<html><head></head><body>Thu, 10 May 2007 09:12:56 -0400 from: R. David Riceman <driceman@att.net><BR><BR>>>Zvi Lampel wrote:<BR>> It is not so poshut to go from the classical cases of temporarily <BR>> interrupting one's learning for doing an immediately necessary deed <BR>> that required no training, to the kind of training and more permanent <BR>> time commitment that preparing for Zaka requires, and certainly to <BR>> the time and effort needed to become a medic in preparation for <BR>> situations not yet in existence (although of course predictably they <BR>> will be). In the first case, Talmud Torah remains the kevius, as <BR>> opposed to in the other two cases.<<<BR><BR>RDR:<BR>>The Shulhan Arukh requires (YD 245:1) kvias ittim day and night. It <BR>recommends (ibid. 21, especially in the Rama) that in order for divrei <BR>Torah to be "miskayymim" that one make them ikkar and other occupations <BR>tafel. It is this second form of kevius that you are recommending, yet, <BR>as far as I can tell, there's no halachic requirement for a person to <BR>ensure that his divrei Torah be "miskayymim".<BR><BR>ZL:<BR>I wasn't making any recommendations. I was just commenting on a post that used (a) the halacha about temporarily interrupting one's learning to indicate that (b) one has reason to be a Zakka member, and then that therefore (c) one has reason to study medicine. I commented that it is not so poshut to go from (a) to (b) or from (b) to (c). I was commenting on the logic, not the conclusion.<BR><BR>>Furthermore the prohibition of interrupting Talmud Torah is expressed as <BR>"hayah l'fanav" (ibid. 18). which seems to mean interrupting ittim <BR>kevuim rather than any potential opportunity to learn.<BR><BR>>As an example, my own doctor, in addition to working at a teaching <BR>hospital and running his private practice manages to be president of the <BR>shul and to be kovea ittim. I've never understood the halachic meaning <BR>of the phrase "not so poshut" (I hope RZL will translate into Rabbinnic <BR>Hebrew), but I think his behavior is not only unobjectionable, but even <BR>admirable.<BR><BR>ZL: I agree. <BR> The question about a rabbinical lashon equivelant to "it's not so poshut" in the context I used it (the Latin would be "non-sequitor") is an interesting one worth pursuing. I know that the way it is often used in conversation--when one makes a statement and another says "it's not so poshut" to mean, "I disagree on the grounds that your conclusion is too blanket and simplistic, there are many variables, not everyone agrees to it, it's much more compicated than you're presenting it"--always struck me as itself shallow, if not followed by evidence.<BR><BR>Zvi Lampel <BR><BR><br></body></html>