Avodah Mailing List

Volume 02 : Number 010

Sunday, October 4 1998

• Ponim Chadashos
• Re: Reform and Conservative heresy
• Chumros
• Chumros
• Re: Techeles is not neutral
• RE: Lack of mesorah and consistency
• Re: Techeiles is not neutral
• RE: Needing a gadol, mesorah/tekhelet
• Re: crachei hayam
• Re: Avodah V2 #8 Psak
• Re: Ponim Chadashos
• Re: Mesorah, Halacha v'Ein Morin Ken, Davar ha'Tamu'a la'Rabbim
• conservative
• t'cheyles
• Re: t'cheyles
• RE: Lack of mesorah and consistency
• atem keruim adam
• RE: Lack of mesorah and consistency
• Fwd: Avodah V2 #9-re: techeiles

I asked Rav Moshe Sternbuch  - today -  whether women can be ponim chadoshos
and he said no. I asked him also whether a person can rely on the Chasam Sofer
to permit them and he said no.

                                                           Daniel Eidensohn

In message , Joelirich@aol.com writes
>I agree you would get a variety of responses. The problem with the negative
>influence issue is that it also means that those "less observant" are denied a
>positive influence and the 'more observant' are given the message to "stick to
>your own kind". This may be the message the school wants to give but
>eventually the definition of less observant may become you(fairly or not)! The
>proper balance is a very difficult one and continues  in a state of dynamic
>tension( L"ad). 

This raises something tangential to the topic of discussion here, but
something that is very relevant to increasing numbers of our schools,
and that is, to what extent is it permissible/appropriate for an
Orthodox school to select/reject students because their parents are
hashkafically inadequate (eg they have a television at home) or even
halachically inadequate, where there are no real alternatives.

This question has been brought about by a case that I know about here in
England, where a particular school in London interviewed the young lady
in question (aged 11) and decided that her home was not suitably frum
and rejected taking her into the school. The family is not quite sure on
what grounds precisely, as the letter appeared to be something of a form
rejection letter saying that the family, in the schools view, is not
suitably commited to Torah values.  Alternative Jewish day schools are
both too far away and not affordable for the family, so she is going to
have to go to the local (state) day school.  To make matters worse, here
in England shabbas comes in very early in winter, and the day school
that she will be attending is refusing to allow her to leave early on
Fridays.  Her father has worked out that if they have a minicab waiting
outside the school gates for her the minute school finishes, and there
are no delays or traffic jams etc, she *should* be able to get home in
time - but this is hardly what one would describe as an ideal situation.
(Not of course to mention the feeling of the young lady that she has
somehow managed to let down her whole family) My gut reaction to this is
that it is unconscionable - but no doubt the school justifies it on the
grounds that she (or what her family allows, whatever that is) might
have a negative influence on the other girls in the school. 

>
>Shabbat Shalom
>Joel RIch 
>

Shavuah tov

Chana

-- 
Chana/Heather Luntz

Regarding the issue brought up by Richard Wolpoe, and with Sukkos just
around the corner,  with people spending extra money for Mehadrin Arba
Minim.

Does my obligation to give Tzedakah to a poor person include an obligation
to enable him to do things leMaehadrin i.e. if he can get a Mehadrin Arba
Minim at a  price 50% higher than the cost of "only" a kosher Arba Minim,
do I fulfill my obligation if I only give him enough for a non-Mehadrin
Arba Minim?
Or, if Glatt, super-duper Hashkachah chickens costs 50% more than regular
chickens, do I have to support his desire to be super Kosher?

I realize that in practice, there is rarely a case where the giver gives
directly to the Ani, but, if for example, the Badatz Rabanim would come out
with a Psak that a person subsisting on Tzedakah doesn't need to buy Glatt
chickens, then the burden on both the Aniim and the Tzibbur would be less.

On a similar vein, I have a peeve about beggars who come to the door
reeking of cigarettes.

Benjie Gerstman

Regarding the issue brought up by Richard Wolpoe, and with Sukkos just
around the corner,  with people spending extra money for Mehadrin Arba
Minim.

Does my obligation to give Tzedakah to a poor person include an obligation
to enable him to do things leMaehadrin i.e. if he can get a Mehadrin Arba
Minim at a  price 50% higher than the cost of "only" a kosher Arba Minim,
do I fulfill my obligation if I only give him enough for a non-Mehadrin
Arba Minim?
Or, if Glatt, super-duper Hashkachah chickens costs 50% more than regular
chickens, do I have to support his desire to be super Kosher?

I realize that in practice, there is rarely a case where the giver gives
directly to the Ani, but, if for example, the Badatz Rabanim would come out
with a Psak that a person subsisting on Tzedakah doesn't need to buy Glatt
chickens, then the burden on both the Aniim and the Tzibbur would be less.

In other words, does a person have a right to be Machmir, on someone else's
expense?.

Benjie Gerstman

On Fri, 2 Oct 1998, Daniel Eidensohn wrote:

> Rav Sternbuch vol I #26 page 21-22. "The Radzhiner was surprised why it
> made a difference to the gedolim to be machmir to dye their tzitzis out
> of sofek and he found no answer...I am concerned for the following 1)
> that people will think they are actually fulfilling the mitzva of
> techeles 2) there is a problem of bal tosif to intend to the mitzva of

I fail to understand why people should not hope they are fulfilling the
mitzva of techeles. Perhaps you mean that they will not then be *modeh al
ha'emes* if this is proven not to be the actual techeles. This is a
legitimate concern, but more ethical than halachic.

> techeles when it is not actually so.  Ritva Rosh HaShanna 28b. Rav Chaim
> Volozhiner notes that wearing Rabbeinu Tam's tefilin could be a problem
> of bal tosif.. Besides it is known that the techeles that we have today

Yet many people - including R' Moshe Feinstein and R' Yaakov Kamenetsky
(albeit the latter later in life) wore Rabbeinu Tam's. I, however, fail to
see how techeles can fall into the category of bal tosif. I am away from
home and do not have a Ritva RH. I would appreciate a quote, if someone
has easy access to it.

> might not even be the fish that the Radzhiner specified. But here in
> Israel there was a Rav z"l who examined and found according to his words
> the proper fish. Our practice is according to the poskim not to be
> concerned that this is techeles. There are other objections such as lo
> tisgodedu etc. The Radzhiner argued that this is a sofek doreissa. The

I do not understand how lo tisgodedu is even remotely relevant here. is
there lo tisgodedu if Chassidim wear long peyos, some Misnagdim peyos
behind their ears, and others simple sideburns?

> Brisker Rav replied that we only say sofek doreisa l'chumra in the case
> that when we fulfill the mitzva now we definitely fulfill our obligation
> but here there is no guarantee anything is being accomplished. 
> 

But, that is a great chiddush, which I never heard before, and I do not
know where the Brisker Rav says it, and do not understand it.

> In sum, staining with doubtful techeles is not necessarily a neutral act.
> 
>                                                    Daniel Eidensohn

With all due respect to R' Sternbuch, from my perspective, as I note,
nothing he has said diminishes my position that techeles is neutral.
Nevertheless, I certainly would never be moreh to others to wear it, since
neither I nor anyone else can *definitively* prove its validity - only
that it is quite likely the real McCoy.

YGB

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

On Fri, 2 Oct 1998 cbrown@bestware.com wrote:

> re: YGB's position.   Is every Rav and talmid chacham simply to parrot the
> opinion of those gedolim he respects with no ability to himself decide the
> issue based on knowledge of the sources AS WELL as knowledge of the unique
> shoel's circumstances that can never be addressed in broad public policy
> statements?  You are putting the cart before the horse by saying one must

Not *every* Rav. Just *most* Rabbonim :-) .

> be a 'gadol' to decide a unprecedented sheila based on the sources .  After
> all - isn't it the act of psak and setting precedent that leads us to
> respect some people as gedolim, not  magically attaining this stature which
> then gives them a license to pasken!

Certainly. But, there is a vicious cycle here. You must be an established
Posek before you get to establish psak. This is definitely circular
reasoning and gets us back to our discussion of who is a Gadol. But, there
are people who have surmounted the hurdles of this circular reasoning and
become respected Poskim :-) .

YGB

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

Obviously you are correct. I did not mean techeles is a "chumra" in the
colloquial sense, say, like putting your fridge on a Shabbos clock, I
meant it to say that you are adopting a higher level of halachic
observance.

YGB

On Fri, 2 Oct 1998, Micha Berger wrote:

> R' YGB writes:
> > Firstly, techeles is a chumra, and one cannot lose by doing so, as one
> > fulfills the mitzva of "lavan" with blue colored strings.
> 
> No, techeiles is a mitzvah d'Oraisa; while not a chiyuv, by no means just
> a chumrah. (Clearly in the days of the medrash about Korach's "sh'aylah"

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

On Fri, 2 Oct 1998, Clark, Eli wrote:

> I am afraid that I disagree on the need for a gadol to re-introduce a
> practice with an unassailable halakhic basis.  If a gadol would endorse
> the practice, I would be thrilled, but I don't see it as necessary. 
> Moreover, I don't understand how a historical exigency can remove
> something from the world of halakhah le-ma'aseh.  It seems to me you are
> giving history a veto over Halakhah.  And I find that shocking, to say
> the least. 
> 

There is an issue of public policy here, which can indicate a shev ve'al
ta'aseh approach. It seems that this is the attitude that prevails, right
now, in the majority of the Orthodox world.

> I wonder on what you base this view.  Moreover, I do not understand how
> you can argue that women's participation in a certain activity simply
> never occurred to generations of posekim (thus explaining the omission
> of Ritva/Nimukei Yosef by Mehaber and others), then tell me that a
> negative mesorah exists regarding the issue.  Surely a negative mesorah
> has to be created consciously! 
> 

I think women's zimmun was a wonderful example. I think we might find a
parallel in the "Minhag Yisroel" not to use any means of amplification -
not even transistor microphones, or electronics - even solid state radios
- on Shabbos or Yom Tov.

> >No. But we *here* are not dealing with an unambiguous situation.
> 
> Well, I think we are, but I don't expect we'll agree on that.
> 

We certainly won't! :-)

> A number of aharonim would disagree with that last statement.  Also, if

Who?

> it were true, why does the Gemara express such hostility toward kaleh
> ilan and its purveyors?  If you do not lose by using the wrong dye, then
> why was Hazal so fierce in its statements about using a wrong dye?

As several posters already noted, that was more a concern of ona'ah and
hypocrisy.

YGB

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

In sotah 13a as well as other places the gemora darshens out" ein kira ela
lashon mchira,shecain bcrachei hayam korin lmichira kira".

Does anyone have any insight as to why the dialect in the sea towns would make
a difference in a drasha from a pasuk? Were these Jewish towns?

When asked this question I recalled that I believe The Rav posited that the
gemora often quotes folk wisdom and shows its basis in halacha/tora so as to
base it in the residue of the knowledge of tora that each of us was taught
prenataly and then was removed from us by the angel just prior to birth. I
thought to say that perhaps a similar phenomena was true in dialects or that
perhaps these dialects retained some earlier meanings of the words that had
passed from common usage.

Any help would be welcome

shavua tov and chag sameach
Joel Rich

On Fri, 2 Oct 1998 cbrown@bestware.com wrote:

>               and shoel presents unique twists and considerations? While
>               YGB's point is relevant for public policy, it does not
>               address the kallah who has innocently invited a female friend
>               to sheva berachos to serve as panim chaddashos, and the Rav
>               must choose to rely on the Chasam Sofer, whose writings even
>               in chiddushim need be taken seriously as a matter of halacha,
>               or canceling sheva berachos for the night.  Once we
>               acknowledge the Chasam Sofer as a reliable source, the issues
>               of precedent and public policy become factors to be weighed
>               against embarassment of the chassan v'kallah and other
>               circumstances of the individual case.

It is the job of the Rav in that case, if he cannot find a ponim chadashos
(male) to explain the problem of brocho l'vatala, and then remind everyone
that the mitzva of simchas chosson v'kalla is not contingent on the
berachos, and have a great se'udas mitzva! 

YGB


Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

One might assume I would be happy to receive this confirmation of my
position, but I am afraid I am not. R' Sternbuch, with all due respect, is
the hnorary president of the Eida Charedis. I also remember, years ago,
perusing his sefer on Shemitta and being impressed that he treated R' Kook
in an improper manner. I would prefer a psak from a less extreme source.
Since you are in Ir HaKodesh, could you contact R' ZN Goldberg, R' Shlomo
Fischer, R' EY Waldenberg or someone of that more universal nature?

YGB 


On Sat, 3 Oct 1998, Daniel Eidensohn wrote:

> I asked Rav Moshe Sternbuch  - today -  whether women can be ponim chadoshos
> and he said no. I asked him also whether a person can rely on the Chasam Sofer
> to permit them and he said no.
> 
>                                                            Daniel Eidensohn

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

On Sat, 3 Oct 1998, Daniel Eidensohn wrote:

> I am curious to know where the above comes from? There is a letter from Rav
> Elyashiv which has been circulated in the yeshivos here to counter such
> claims. Is your claim  based on material before or after his denial?
> 
>                                                            Daniel Eidensohn

I have no idea. It is in an essay on Techeles posted on the Ptil Techelet
website, authored by the Rav of the Torah va'Da'as minyan in Boro Park.
Ayain Sham!

YGB

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

Concerning your 'final observation' ( I inserted it below ) I have one
comment, which I made earlier on in the thread.  The charedi world is still
fighting the battles of a century ago when dealing with the non-Orthodox.
They make little, if any, effort at actual kiruv, and are more afraid of the
non-Orthodox branches stealing away unsuspecting Orthodox.

The more centrist Orthodox, while fully cognizant of the emptyness of non-
Orthodoxy are trying to reach out to them.  Their lack of admonition is not
coddling up to them, nor is it because of a desire to not hurt their feelings.
I see it as an attempt to keep avenues of dialogue open in order to maintain
the ability to have an impact upon them.

Of course there are other, also important, considerations to take into
account.  To be blunt, the Orthodox outside Israel often need the non-Orthodox
in order to push their agenda, be it religious protection, or political
pressure.  The Orthodox alone are too small a minority to be effective
lobbyists for their own causes.  In Israel, this is not the case, as we see
from the growth of the charedi political parties.

<<
One final observation, the chareidi world especially in Israel is much more
willing
to publicly describe Conservative and Reform as heresy. In contrast, the
Modern
Orthodox are more concerned with what Rabbi Clark has described as hurting
people's
feelings. The blunt comments of Reb Moshe are not to be found in public
statements
of the Modern Orthodox  - though they are readily found in the Jewish Observer
or
Yeted. There are parts of the the latest Jewish Action that are almost
apologetic.
I am not asserting that the Modern Orthodox especially as represented by Rabbi
Lamm
are less concerned with Mitzvos or that the Chareidi are not aware of the
issue of
hurting feelings - but they have taken different approaches to this problem.
Before
proclaiming that there is one correct way of dealing with this problem - it is
important to see how respected and sensitive people from the various parts of
the
Orthodox spectrum are dealing with it. I don't think that Rabbi Clark is any
more
sensitive to Chilul Hashem etc than was Rav Moshe or the Chofetz Chaim nor am
I
claiming that he is less aware of the Mitzva of Tochacha than they. There are
two
different approaches - unfortunately neither seems to be making much impact.
>>

<<
(According to the Tif'eres Yisrael, any indellible blue dye of the right shade
is usable as techeiles. The importance of chilazon is that it was the only
such dye known until modern times. In which case, there'd be no safeik --
and therefore no lichatchilah vs. b'dieved -- to worry about.)
>>

I think the g'mara's concern with kla ilan argues against this Tiferes
Yisrael.  They were aware of an identical shade blue coming from a different
source.  And that dye was not acceptable.

Eliyahu

In a message dated 98-10-04 01:10:02 EDT, you write:

<< 
 I think the g'mara's concern with kla ilan argues against this Tiferes
 Yisrael.  They were aware of an identical shade blue coming from a different
 source.  And that dye was not acceptable.
 
 Eliyahu
 
  >>
In a talk on this topic The Rav stated that (based on the Rambam)the problem
with kla ilan was its non-permanence, not the color.

Chag Sameach
Joel Rich

>>>YGB:Certainly. But, there is a vicious cycle here. You must be an
established Posek before you get to establish psak.<<<

I raise the paradox it simply as a logical problem with your approach.

YGB felt the need for precedent bec.: >>a. This is in the chiddushim, not
the teshuvos. b. It seems to me, that if the Chasam Sofer held that way
l'ma'aseh, there would have been an extant mesorah to use women as ponim
chadashos. (and I won't deal with the rest)<<

What about Pnei Yehoshua, Tzlach, R' Akiva Eiger and hosts of other
achronim whose chiddushim we live by without a need to see it in a tshuva?
The second point is moot: can you really expect a historical precedent for
allowing woman as panim chaddashot considering the role/place of women in
the cultural world of Chasam Sofer?  The point was theoretical to him not
for halachic reasons (he mentions no reservations!), but practically the
question was only theoretical in his day and age - even today, what are the
odds of this being practical?

I can respect a psak against the Chasm Sofer based on the Piskei Tshuvah -
I don't see the need for these rules of hora'ah that have no precedent : -
)
-CB

The Tif. Yisrael Avos 3:13 has a discussion of the derasha "atem keruim
adam" which he introduces with "mitzva l'farsem" - so I'm doing my mitzva.
In a nutshell, he writes Jewish civilization is like adam in that it is the
product of Divine revelation, complete in a mature state, unlike other
cultures which had to go through a period of intellectual/social
development before becoming civilized, hence are only referred to as bnei
adam.

Good Yom Tov to all,

-CB

On Sun, 4 Oct 1998 cbrown@bestware.com wrote:

> YGB felt the need for precedent bec.: >>a. This is in the chiddushim,
> not the teshuvos. b. It seems to me, that if the Chasam Sofer held that
> way l'ma'aseh, there would have been an extant mesorah to use women as
> ponim chadashos. (and I won't deal with the rest)<<
> 
> What about Pnei Yehoshua, Tzlach, R' Akiva Eiger and hosts of other
> achronim whose chiddushim we live by without a need to see it in a
> tshuva? 

Could we have some specific examples?

> The second point is moot: can you really expect a historical precedent
> for allowing woman as panim chaddashot considering the role/place of
> women in the cultural world of Chasam Sofer?  The point was theoretical
> to him not

I fail to understand this. do you think women were not invited to Shava
Berachos in Pressburg - or hitherto, in Frankfurt? 

Derech agav, one must remember that Frankfurt is German, and Pressburg
(now Bratislava, I think, Slovakia) is Oberland - the more liberal part of
Hungary, not Unterland, where the Satmers etc. were based. That the
Satmers and Munkatchers adopted the CS is not his fault. We know, to the
best of my knowledge, of no "regressive" policies of the CS. 

> for halachic reasons (he mentions no reservations!), but practically the
> question was only theoretical in his day and age - even today, what are the
> odds of this being practical?
>

Very good odds, both then and now. It would often be extraordinarily
convenient to have women serve as PC.
 
> I can respect a psak against the Chasm Sofer based on the Piskei Tshuvah
> - I don't see the need for these rules of hora'ah that have no precedent
> : - )  -CB

I don't need respect! But, I do most definitely see the need for
precedent :-) .

YGB

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago,
IL, 60659 ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

Recently, in discussing the reply of the Beis HaLevi to the Radziner that the
identity of techeilis needs a masorah and once it's lost it can only be
restored by a navi, Rav Ahron Soloveichek quoted Rav Chaim Brisker as saying
that if someone would, today, wear what is claimed to be techeilis on his
beged, he would be in the category of 'hapatur min hadavar veoseihu nikra
hedyot.'

********************


[ Distributed to the Avodah mailing list, digested version.           ]
[ To post: mail to avodah@aishdas.org                                 ]
[ For control requests: mail the word "help" to majordomo@aishdas.org ]