Avodah Mailing List

Volume 02 : Number 028

Thursday, October 22 1998

• Re[2]: T'cheles Revisited
• Re: tekheles revisited
• Telshe vs. Brisk
• Re: tekheles revisited
• Observations/Reflections on Smicha
• synagogue & kehilla
• angels and eitz hada'as
• Re: angels and eitz hada'as
• Humanism and halacha, rent control
• Re: Titles
• Adam kodem hacheit
• Re: angels and eitz hada'as
• Re[2]: angels and eitz hada'as

     I heard that the Talito with Techiles are quite expensive....
     
     Also Talit/Talitot sounds nekeivo t ome so why Talis Gadol and Katon 
     and not Gedolo and Ketano?
     
     Rich Wolpoe


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: RE: T'cheles Revisited  
Author:  <avodah@aishdas.org> at Tcpgate
Date:    10/21/98 4:13 PM


Even if it's not cost effective to do both (btw, how much do tcheyles tzisis 
cost?), shouldn't there be a logic to put them on either the tallis koton 
(todir?) or the tallis gadol (hidur?), but not to leave it up to an 
individual's own predilection?
     
Avi Pechman
     
> -----Original Message-----
> From: richard_wolpoe@ibi.com [mailto:richard_wolpoe@ibi.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 1998 5:01 PM
> To: avodah@aishdas.org
> Subject: Re: T'cheles Revisited 
> 
> 
>      I once heard something like this: 
>      
>      That some people (based on a Gro I believe) davka wear 
> cotton arba 
>      confos as if to go out of their way to be meakyem the wool 
>      (mid'oreiso) in their Talis Gadol and do miderabbon  on 
> their Talis 
>      Koton.... therefore, perhaps, the techiles people are 
> choshesh to be 
>      yotsei yedei shneihem
>      
>      Also, perhaps it is not economically feasible to do both. 
>      
>      Rich Wolpoe
>      
>      
> 
> 
> ______________________________ Reply Separator 
> _________________________________
> Subject: T'cheles Revisited 
> Author:  <avodah@aishdas.org> at Tcpgate 
> Date:    10/21/98 11:42 AM
> 
> 
> I know a number of gentlemen who wear t'cheles on their talis 
> gadol and 
> not on their talis katan.
> I also know a number of gentlemen who wear t'cheles on the 
> talis katan 
> and not on their talis gadol.
> Who has a good teretz?
>      
> steve        katzco@sprintmail.com 
>      
>      
> 
     

Being the only one around wearing techeiles might raise p'rishah min hatzibur
issues.

Putting strings on a talis katan with the strings worn inside the pants avoids
that.

-mi

(It's off topic, but the price of one set of techeiles is comparable to what
many spend on an esrog.)

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287    Help free Yehuda Katz, held by Syria 5956 days!
micha@aishdas.org                         (11-Jun-82 - 21-Oct-98)
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.
http://www.aishdas.org -- Orthodox Judaism: Torah, Avodah, Chessed

From time to time I like to express my preference for the Telzer/R' Shimon
Shkop Derech over the Brisker Derech. I have not yet done so on Avodah. It
is high time! :-) 

To my mind, one of the great tragedies of the modern Yeshiva world is that
all Telzers - practically - have become Briskers. Al dah vadai ka'bachina!

The following excerpt on the Telzer Derech with examples is a small part
of a large essay available from Avodah's parent's website. The article is
at http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila/telshe.htm

YGB

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


The Telzer Derech

	We mentioned that Telshe was renowned for a unique derech halimud
of Havona and Higoyon. This derech is manifest in both the Talmudic lomdus
and derech avoda in Machashava and Mussar practiced in the Lithuanian
Telshe. An illustrious Telzer, Rabbi Elimelech Bar Shaul zt"l, in his
foreword to the Shiurei Da'as, points out that a synopsis of the derech
may be found in the shiur da'as: "Chomer viTzura."
	The Ba'alei Machashava state that all objects in Creation consist
of chomer, the physical substance of the object; and tzura, its spiritual
essence. Intellectual ideas also consist of chomer and tzura. The chomer
of an idea is its expression in thought and words. The tzura of the idea
is the manner in which the idea expands and expresses itself in one's
heart. The chomer of an idea varies little from person to person. It is in
the tzura of the idea that we may distinguish between individuals. If an
individual maintains lifelong intellectual growth, the tzura of the ideas
that he or she has assimilated will change and grow more profound over
time.
	The greatness of Gedolei Yisroel is not manifest in the chomer of
their knowledge. Many bright people might master vast tracts of Torah. It
is in the tzura of their chochma that their greatness is manifest. That is
why when Chazal describe the greatness of previous generations they talk
in terms of "the Rishonim's heart" (Eruvin 53a). In Mo'ed Kattan 9a Rabbi
Shimon bar Yochai tells his son that he should pursue berachos from
"people of tzura." In Shabbos 63a we are told about the "tzura dishemata",
the tzura of a sugya. When Chazal describe later generations, they define
their insight as "a finger upon wax." The earlier generations excelled in
their penetrating understanding - their heart. The later generations are
superficial - like a finger that manipulates wax. They might have the same
chomer, but they lack the tzura. (It is significant that Chazal, despite
their lower level vis a vis the earlier generations, still felt qualified
to define their greatness. We can transcend our normal capacities and
perceive, at least from afar, what made the earlier generations greater;
what tzura they possessed.)
	In Yuma 72b we are told that a fool attempts to acquire wisdom
without heart - without its tzura. One who strives for wisdom will attempt
to uplift him or herself toward an idea and its most profound tzura. Most
people, however, will attempt to bring a lofty intellectual idea down to
their own level. In Torah, at the core of any idea is the yiras shomayim
it should provide us. When a great person delivers a shiur, he not only
gives over the chomer of the ideas being considered, but also the tzura of
his wisdom. This is evident in his facial expression: "The wisdom of an
individual illuminates his face" (Koheles 8). This manifest tzura
comprised the radiance of Moshe Rabbeinu - "for his face shone" (Shemos
34).
	The quest for tzura is the hallmark of the Telzer derech. It is in
this quest that Telshe departed from Brisk. In Brisk, the primary method
of analysis is categorization. The classic "tzvei dinim" is a brilliant
tool for the definition of "what". For example: What is this idea? Is it
one that pertains to the gavra (the person) or to the cheftza (the
object)? In Telshe, however, the primary method of analysis is
abstraction, e.g., what is the essence of this idea, how does it work and
why does it work the way it does.
	(In his introduction to his definitive work on the Rogatchover
zt"l's derech, "Mefa'anei'ach Tzefunos", Rabbi Menachem Mendel Kasher zt"l
relates the following anecdote: The Greek philosopher Plato was once
strolling with one of his disciples. They saw a horse in the street. Plato
turned to his companion and asked him: "What do you see?" The student
responded: "I see a horse." Plato then said to him: "I see the
`horseness', the abstract of a horse. You lack perception, and you,
therefore, do not possess the talent of profound intellectual insight. You
only possess the vision of the physical senses, which cannot grasp
essences." Rabbi Kasher notes a similar comment by the Rambam in Moreh
Nevuchim 2:6.)
	The pursuit of tzura underlies the Telzer approach to all areas of
Jewish thought and endeavor. Tzura is related to the term "da'as" in the
system of chochma, bina, da'as. As Reb Yosef Leib explains (in the shiur
da'as: "Chochma, Bina, Da'as") chochma is knowledge: the warehouse of
accumulated facts one amasses. Bina is understanding: a Navon categorizes
facts in his or her heart, depicts them in his or her mind, experiences
their full breadth and depth, and can extrapolate from them to new
intellectual areas. Da'as is achieved when chochma, characterized and
developed by bina, becomes one with a person's essence and being, so much
so that a person can conclude that this da'as is absolute truth. The
Jewish soul has been designed by Hashem specifically to allow an
individual to achieve this da'as. We are connected to the highest
spiritual realms [olamos elyonim] and we are "hard-wired" to allow us to
grasp their essences.  Hashem designed characteristic human traits to
reflect the attributes that He employs in directing Creation...

	A focal theme in Telzer thought is the supremacy of intellect and
intellectual endeavor. The more we expand our intellect, the greater
positive spiritual impact we have on the universe - and on ourselves. We
then feel uplifted and our souls are unified with and enlivened by the
spiritual worlds (shiur da'as: "VaYikra Bishem Hashem"). Reb Avrohom
Yitzchok wrote: "This derech unifies logic and poetry. The logic is a
logic of poetry and the poetry is a poetry of logic." He explained: "The
firmest emuna is Emuna Peshuta, with the utmost simplicity. Hashem,
however, has granted man a unique intellect, with the capacity to think
with profundity. Man is therefore obliged to channel these divine gifts in
the service of Hashem, i.e., to deepen and strengthen his emuna and Avodas
Hashem by analyzing them deeply." There are limits to our understanding.
At some point we must halt our inquiries with the conclusion: "This is the
will of Hashem, whether I understand it or not" - but the road is very
long until we reach that point, and, often, upon subsequent further
analysis we can understand more than we previously thought (shiur da'as:
"Al Yechsar HaMozeg")...

	A true Telzer toils mightily to uncover and reveal the roots,
essences and abstracts - the core truths - of all areas of Torah. The
deeper one delves, the more the differences between Halacha and Agada
blur. As one's understanding becomes more profound, as one achieves more
tzura, one is penetrating more deeply into the very neshama of Torah. The
more profound the principle one uncovers, the more it explains (shiur
da'as: "Nishmas HaTorah". Reb Yosef Leib emphasizes that the true pleasure
of Torah study only comes with ascendance into its neshama. See Rashi
Shabbos 88b d.h. LaMiyamnin Ba. ) This is manifest in the remarkable
similarity between Reb Yosef Leib's Shiurei Halacha and Shiurei Da'as. If
a Torah idea truly possesses a certain tzura, then that tzura must be an
essential truth. If it is an essential truth, it should be consistently
true across the entire vast tract of our Toras Emes. (A brief, but
comprehensive, discussion of the Telzer derech is to be found in Reb Elya
Meir's introductory essay in Shiurei Da'as: "Darcha shel Torah".)


Some Examples of the Unique Telzer Derech HaLimud

1. Toch kedei dibbur kidibbur dami: An act done or verbalization uttered
within the span of time that it takes to say the words "Shalom alecha
rabbi" of a preceding act or verbalization is considered linked to that
prior act or verbalization. Reb Yosef Leib explains this principle:
	In truth it is impossible to determine how finely time can be
divided, for although we measure time by seconds, in fact each second may
be divided yet further. The possibilities to divide time into still
smaller segments are endless. It would thus seem impossible to determine
an inherent quantitative maximum interval that Halacha would regard as
linking two events.
	Time, therefore, is measured and divided based on man's senses.
Chazal understood that any movement, verbalization, thought or deed that
person performs engages him for a certain time span following its
performance. A person is not at rest until toch kidei dibbur after the
deed is done. You may readily perceive this when you do or speak some
matter that requires concentration and immediately after that must respond
to another person. For example, when you complete a beracha and
immediately afterwards must attend to some mundane matter, you feel as if
your kavana has been interrupted. This is because for some time after you
complete a task your heart is still focused on it.
	That is why Halacha measures all man's activities by the unit of
toch kidei dibbur.

2. Tenai: If a lender marries a woman with objects given to him as
collateral on a loan, the marriage is valid - even if the borrower
redeemed that collateral during the loan's term. This is difficult to
understand. After all, a lender only holds the collateral as security. His
ownership thereof should be conditional on the borrower's defaulting on
payment, which, here, did not occur.
	Reb Yosef Leib explains that ownership on an object can be limited
and divided. One individual may have certain rights of ownership in the
object and a second individual other rights of ownership in the same
object. Similarly, two individuals can limit and divide their ownership in
a way that is conditional on some future condition. This is not the
conventional notion of a condition, which postulates that the outcome of
the condition will validate the ownership of one party and void that of
the other. In Reb Yosef Leib's perspective, as long as the condition does
not come into play each party has partial ownership. Only then will the
ownership of the person on the "losing" side of the condition end.
	In our case, therefore, until the condition of payment (or
default) is met, the collateral is owned jointly by both the lender and
the borrower. The lender's marriage via the object is, therefore, valid. 

3. Eidei kiyum: A valid Halachic marriage ceremony requires the chosson to
both give an object to the kalla and to expressly say that he is giving
her this object to marry her. This is true even if this was obviously the
chosson's intent: if he didn't make an explicit statement, the marriage is
invalid. Why? Reb Yosef Leib explains: 
	We obviously know that the chosson's intent in presenting the
object to the kalla was to effect marriage. A person, however, can
function at different levels of intent. When we analyze man's potential
levels of intent, we readily discern that the intent and decisiveness of
an individual is greater when he performs a transaction in front of
witnesses than when he performs the same transaction in private. Halacha
requires different levels of intent and decisiveness for different
transactions. The more powerful the bond that must be created through the
transaction, the greater the decisiveness required. To effect Kiddushin,
Halacha requires an unequivocal statement by the chosson in front of
witnesses whose presence is known to him.

4. Migo dezachei linafshei zachei nami lichavrei: Normally, a person
cannot, on his own initiative, act on behalf of another person where such
activity will prove detrimental to others [tofes liba'al chov bimakom
dichav liacharinei]. To acquire a random lost object for one person is to
deprive it from all others. Such an acquisition, therefore, should not be
valid. Where, however, the person picking up the random lost object could
have acquired it for himself, he may acquire it on behalf of another. The
conventional understanding of this procedure is that since [mego] the
individual picking up the object is entitled to act on his own behalf, he
may, therefore, transfer that license to the person for whom he intends to
pick up the object.
	There are several difficulties with this understanding. For
example, if such a case occurred on Yom Tov, Halacha imposes a techum,
i.e. a prohibition on carrying the object over the boundaries of the two
thousand square amah area in which the owner may travel. One opinion
states that this object is subject to the limitations of the person who
picked it up. According to the conventional understanding, however, the
person that picked up the object is never its owner. Why should the object
be restricted to his techum?
	Reb Yosef Leib, therefore, explains this procedure differently: In
fact, the person who picks up the object acquires it and owns it.
Ownership is not always narrowly defined as the possession of an object.
Even an object that never actually came into one's hands may be
considered, in a broader, more abstract sense, owned by that individual -
if that person derived use and benefitted from the object. Since such use
has tangible value, it places the object within one's realm of ownership.
It is in that broader sense that the person who picks up the object and
give it to another exercises ownership. One of the rights and uses of
ownership is the right to give an object one owns to someone else. He thus
becomes, initially, the first owner of this object, and, therefore, it is
his techum that restricts the object's movement on that Yom Tov. 

In a message dated 98-10-21 18:11:01 EDT, you write:

<< 
 Being the only one around wearing techeiles might raise p'rishah min hatzibur
 issues.
 
 Putting strings on a talis katan with the strings worn inside the pants
avoids
 that.
 
 -mi
  >>
I know someone who only wears them on talit katan due to issues of yhora (not
a problem if worn inside) but would wear  on talit gadol when someone else in
community does.

Kol tuv

Joel Rich

This thread reminds me of an anecdote told over to me in the name of R. 
Chaim Shmulevitz.  R Chaim was standing in a corner of the Bais 
HaMedrash in the Mir during a Shmuess of some kind and one of the 
speakers was announced to come take his turn in front of the podium.  
After a few moments had lapsed without him coming forward,  R. Chaim was 
overheard saying, "Ruft ehm HaRav HaGoan, vell er balt kumen tzu lofen." 
("Call him HaRav HaGoan, and he'll quickly come running")  
 
The Conferring of real Smicha, of course was discontinued about 2000 
years ago. Even though there was an attempt at revival during the time 
of R. Yosef Caro, who actually received one of these Smichos, the 
practice was not universally accepted and had to be abandoned.  Today's 
smicha is far less meaningful and may indeed have become totally 
irrelevant.

Unfortunately, in our day and age, titles are given out far to easily.  
When I was a student in the Yeshiva it was common practice for many of 
us to take afternoon school teaching jobs usually coinciding with our 
entry into a very high level gemmorah shiur, that of R. Mordechai Rogov. 
 In order for us to have any respect from the students we would have to 
call ourselves "Rabbi" so and so, even when we were far away from 
getting smicha.  It was also, policy  (although I'm not sure if it was 
official policy) at the yeshiva for those of us who had achieved entry 
into Rav Mordechai Rogov's shiur, that we were entitled to be called 
"Rav uManhig b"Yisroel" and, therefore, Rabbi.  Ostensibly, by being in 
Rebbe's shiur ( Rebbe, was Rav Rogov's title of endearment given to him 
by all who had the zchus to be in his shiur) we were supposedly on a 
very high level of learning and were in some way entitled to that 
honorific.  The truth is that the level of learning was not uniform on 
the part of the students and in some cases there were some real 
ignoramuses in that shiur.  (Rebbe just ignored those individuals and 
taught to the motivated students.)  

Because of the Viet Nam War and various other reasons, many students of, 
shall we say, not high caliber, (to say the least) continued on through 
the intensive 3 year smicha program instituted by R. Aaron Soloveichik 
and, somehow, received an actual Yoreh Yoreh (Smicha, as we know it 
today)!  It is simply amazing to me to see the disparity between the two 
opposite ends of the Yoreh Yoreh spectrum of those people who received 
smicha:  from major talmidei chachamim to complete ignoramuses!

And then there the Israeli "Smichos"!  In some cases you can go to 
Israel, and get a quickie smicha, an actual Yoreh Yoreh, in just a few 
months!  

Yeshivas Chaim Berlin gives you smicha without any Bechinos if you learn 
there long enough.  A very chashuva Rav here in Chicago has that kind of 
smicha.  

Contrast that with the Chafitz Chaim who did not get smicha until very 
near the end of his life, long after he had written his magnum opus, the 
Mishna Berurah. 

Also, I have heard that Rabbi Dovid Zucker, the Rosh Kolel of the 
Lakewood Community Kolel here in Chicago, a man who has learned all of 
Shas several times and is one of the most respected poskim here in 
Chicago, does NOT have smicha.  (I may be wrong about this and have 
heard conflicting reports about it.  I do not feel it appropriate to ask 
him this type of question)

My own son refuses to get smicha as he considers it a waste of time.  He 
is in his sixth year in Yeshivas Mir, Yerushalayim, and one of seventy 
hand picked young men selected by the Rosh HaYeshiva, Harav, HaGoan,  R. 
Nosson Tzvi Finkel, Shlita to learn Kodshim.

Bottom line: It is to bad that the conferring of smicha today has 
degenerated to a level of such insignificance.  What was once amongst 
the loftiest of goals by any Yeshiva student has now been reduced to 
almost ridicule. For many who worked diligently to receive smicha and 
are truly deserving of it, it is a shame to have to be embarrassed by 
those amongst their ranks who have smicha and in some cases, barely read 
Hebrew.

HM

Actually, I was less interested in its capacity to tax and more
interested in its capacity to ensure uniformity of practice within its
domain.  In particular, if a synagogue is not a kehilla can it ever
change its own minhagim, and by what mechanism? How does a new synagogue
aquire minhagim?

David Riceman

YGB asks: Why is there any less of a chiyuv to know the "celestial plumbing
system" than to know Mesechta Nega'im?

Simple: masechet negaim is a kiyum of talmud torah, as is all study of
halachot.  Studying angelic properties is not.  

YGB further wrote:What is "independent value?" Is Talmud Torah not a value? In
and of itself, whether there is a nafka mina or not?

Talmud torah certainly is.  Counting the # of angels that dance on the head of
a pin is not.  That's why, as I wrote, all sifrei mussar, hashkafa, etc. all
open with a justification for the work as advancing yirat shamayim, etc. -
they have no intrinsic value as Torah the way mes. negaim does, the value is
only in so far as these works enhance kiyumim of various avodot she-balev.

Re: Adam HaRishon and shem Yisrael YGB wrote: There is no "proof." 

Then I obviously remain unconvinced and don't understand why anyone would
suggest this with no proof.  When there is no kabbalas mitzvot, no national
identity of klal yisrael, etc. what does a shem yisrael mean?  The concept of
orlah can easily be understood metaphorically, but even if taken literally I
do not know if being an arel alone is indicative of being a Yisrael.
Regarding the eitz being a chok - so what?  It was sui generis, being as
different from all of Taryag mitzvot as from mitzvot bnei noach.

On Wed, 21 Oct 1998 C1A1Brown@aol.com wrote:

> Simple: masechet negaim is a kiyum of talmud torah, as is all study of
> halachot.  Studying angelic properties is not. 
> 

Huh? Is the study of Nefesh HaChaim not Talmud Torah? If not, then is the
study of R' Chaim Brisker Talmud Torah? I see no difference between
Chochmas Hashem Yisborach as expressed in one than in the other. Do you
have any proof to your position?

> YGB further wrote:What is "independent value?" Is Talmud Torah not a
> value? In and of itself, whether there is a nafka mina or not? 
> 
> Talmud torah certainly is.  Counting the # of angels that dance on the
> head of a pin is not.  That's why, as I wrote, all sifrei mussar,

You are attempting to reduce the matter to frivolity and thus dismiss it.
This is a debating tactic, and I am unmoved. To know what serafim, ofanim
and chayos do is an essential part of Torah. I believe it is called
"Ma'aseh Merkava."

> hashkafa, etc. all open with a justification for the work as advancing
> yirat shamayim, etc. - they have no intrinsic value as Torah the way
> mes. negaim does, the value is only in so far as these works enhance
> kiyumim of various avodot she-balev.
> 

This is not Mussar we are discussing. That is the derech eretz she'kadma
laTorah. This is Torah itself. See Yechezkel Chap. 1.

> Re: Adam HaRishon and shem Yisrael YGB wrote: There is no "proof." 
> 
> Then I obviously remain unconvinced and don't understand why anyone
> would suggest this with no proof.  When there is no kabbalas mitzvot, no

It is my opinion that we cannot prove very much at all. I do not have,
proof, for example, that you wrote the e-mail to which i am responding.
Evidence yes, proof no. Adam ha'Rishon lifnei ha'cheit - proof no,
evidence, yes.

There was Kabbolas Mitzvos (see Chazal on "l'avda u'l'shamra" - zu mitzvos
aseh u'mitzvos lo ta'aseh. And, the identity of Am Yisroel was coextensive
with Adam the person.

> national identity of klal yisrael, etc. what does a shem yisrael mean? 
> The concept of orlah can easily be understood metaphorically, but even
> if taken literally I do not know if being an arel alone is indicative of
> being a Yisrael.  Regarding the eitz being a chok - so what?  It was sui
> generis, being as different from all of Taryag mitzvot as from mitzvot
> bnei noach. 
> 
> 
> 
> 

YGB

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

A minor thread developed recently  the relationship between humanism and Torah
and whether an ethic independent of halacha exists.  I'd just like to note the
comments of Netziv on the opening of Noach and later 9:26-27.  Yefet and Noach
represent he value of humanism/morality and are rewarded positively through
teva (indicated by the shem Elokim), but Shem represents a higher level of
observance based on ratzon Hashem alone which is rewarded outside the
framework of teva (indicated by use of the shem havaya).  

B"M 101b discusses the rights of a landlord to evict tenants and raise their
rent.  Is anyone aware of any shut literature that relates to the issue of
rent control (for those in other parts of the world: the policy of states like
NYis to curtial the right of landlords to raise rent beyond a certain amount
in order to make affordable housing available)?  

-CB

On Wed, 21 Oct 1998, Steve. Katz wrote:

> Come to Skokie where rav umanhig is the most often granted s'micha and 
> where you can even get yoreh yoreh without having learned yoreh deah or 
> taken a bechinah.
> steve   katzco@sprintmail.com

Maybe this was the situation in the seventies (or whenever) but now there
are specific requirement to receive the rav umanhig. They include the
learning of chelek 1,2,3,5,6 as well as most of 4 in the shulchan orech
(orech chaim with the perush of the mishna brurah) as well as passing
tests on each one. I know becuase I have one of only four given out at
beis medrash latorah ( I imagine this is what you referred to when you said
Skokie)in the last couple of years. I'm also confused about two points.
Why is talking about angels and the way Hashem relates to us as well as the
spiritual being a bad thread when discussing who should have the title of
Rabbi is a good thread. I thought this was high level Torah topics. Second,
I'm not sure of the whole point in the Rabbi discussion. Can anyone tell
me who I should call Rabbi? Choice A: someone who has dedicated his life
to Torah and yiras shamayim, learning parts of shas as well as the parts
of halacha which is relevant to day to day life,and has a kesher with a
rav who he can ask sheilos to, or choice B: someone who is in a three year
s'micha program in a yeshiva somewhere in new york , where he has a TV in
his apartment and partakes of the finest elements of American culture.
Will probably end up being a very respectable Baal habass, and probably
still won't be able to answer a difficult Sheila anyways, but has an
official s'micha because he was in a program for three years when he was
21 years old. I'll call mister A a Rabbi much quicker. What about you?
Elie Ginsparg
 

>(3)
>Yisreal af al pi she-chatath yisreal hu - I guess you will make eitz hada'as
>an exception to the rule? 

According to Rav Tzadok HaKohen (Machshevos Charutz, p. 102), af al pi
shechata Yisrael hu began to apply when Yaakov Avinu's children were born,
at which time hachut hemeshulash lo bimeheirah yinatek came into effect. He
cites Kiddushin 18a which refers to Esav as a Yisrael mumar, indicating that
he once had kedushas Yisrael but lost it. Accordingly, the same could have
happened with Adam.

Yisrael Herczeg

     I'm not sure that counting the # of angels on a pinhead is not Torah.
     
     I hinted at the dichotomy before.
     
     Negaim, no matter how obscure or doifficult is nigleh.
     
     "celestial plumbing " is nistar.
     
     I think MOST Talmidei chachomim would agree that Nigleh takes 
     precedence.
     
     In the context of the rebbe in yeshiva - I take it to mean thusly:
     
     Let's learn some basic Torah.  when your mature and know a really lot 
     THEN go into philosphical speculation on the meaning of life.
     
     Or simply put, get into molei kreiso status first. 

     the secrets of Maase Breishis contain vast amounts of Torah; however, few 
of us are at the level to appreciate it.

My 2 kopecks

Richard Wolpoe


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: angels and eitz hada'as 
Author:  <avodah@aishdas.org> at Tcpgate
Date:    10/21/98 8:57 PM


YGB asks: Why is there any less of a chiyuv to know the "celestial plumbing 
system" than to know Mesechta Nega'im?
     
Simple: masechet negaim is a kiyum of talmud torah, as is all study of 
halachot.  Studying angelic properties is not.  
     
YGB further wrote:What is "independent value?" Is Talmud Torah not a value? In 
and of itself, whether there is a nafka mina or not?
     
Talmud torah certainly is.  Counting the # of angels that dance on the head of 
a pin is not.  That's why, as I wrote, all sifrei mussar, hashkafa, etc. all 
open with a justification for the work as advancing yirat shamayim, etc. - 
they have no intrinsic value as Torah the way mes. negaim does, the value is 
only in so far as these works enhance kiyumim of various avodot she-balev.
     
Re: Adam HaRishon and shem Yisrael YGB wrote: There is no "proof." 
     
Then I obviously remain unconvinced and don't understand why anyone would 
suggest this with no proof.  When there is no kabbalas mitzvot, no national 
identity of klal yisrael, etc. what does a shem yisrael mean?  The concept of 
orlah can easily be understood metaphorically, but even if taken literally I 
do not know if being an arel alone is indicative of being a Yisrael. 
Regarding the eitz being a chok - so what?  It was sui generis, being as 
different from all of Taryag mitzvot as from mitzvot bnei noach.
     
     
     
     

     
As I stated before there's a LOT of Torah in Maase Berishis.  One has to be on a
certain madreigo to "get it"  I would specualte that R YGB is at that level, I 
think I have a long way to go, and if I finish Bavli yersulshalmi, Tosefta, Sifo
Sifrei, Tanach with Rashi, then I could probably appreciate Maase Bereishis 
better.

R Wolpoe

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: angels and eitz hada'as 
Author:  <avodah@aishdas.org> at Tcpgate
Date:    10/21/98 9:07 PM


On Wed, 21 Oct 1998 C1A1Brown@aol.com wrote:
     
> Simple: masechet negaim is a kiyum of talmud torah, as is all study of 
> halachot.  Studying angelic properties is not. 
> 
     
Huh? Is the study of Nefesh HaChaim not Talmud Torah? If not, then is the 
study of R' Chaim Brisker Talmud Torah? I see no difference between 
Chochmas Hashem Yisborach as expressed in one than in the other. Do you 
have any proof to your position?
     
> YGB further wrote:What is "independent value?" Is Talmud Torah not a 
> value? In and of itself, whether there is a nafka mina or not? 
> 
> Talmud torah certainly is.  Counting the # of angels that dance on the 
> head of a pin is not.  That's why, as I wrote, all sifrei mussar,
     
You are attempting to reduce the matter to frivolity and thus dismiss it. 
This is a debating tactic, and I am unmoved. To know what serafim, ofanim 
and chayos do is an essential part of Torah. I believe it is called 
"Ma'aseh Merkava."
     
> hashkafa, etc. all open with a justification for the work as advancing 
> yirat shamayim, etc. - they have no intrinsic value as Torah the way
> mes. negaim does, the value is only in so far as these works enhance 
> kiyumim of various avodot she-balev.
> 
     
This is not Mussar we are discussing. That is the derech eretz she'kadma 
laTorah. This is Torah itself. See Yechezkel Chap. 1.
     
> Re: Adam HaRishon and shem Yisrael YGB wrote: There is no "proof." 
> 
> Then I obviously remain unconvinced and don't understand why anyone
> would suggest this with no proof.  When there is no kabbalas mitzvot, no
     
It is my opinion that we cannot prove very much at all. I do not have, 
proof, for example, that you wrote the e-mail to which i am responding. 
Evidence yes, proof no. Adam ha'Rishon lifnei ha'cheit - proof no, 
evidence, yes.
     
There was Kabbolas Mitzvos (see Chazal on "l'avda u'l'shamra" - zu mitzvos 
aseh u'mitzvos lo ta'aseh. And, the identity of Am Yisroel was coextensive 
with Adam the person.
     
> national identity of klal yisrael, etc. what does a shem yisrael mean? 
> The concept of orlah can easily be understood metaphorically, but even
> if taken literally I do not know if being an arel alone is indicative of 
> being a Yisrael.  Regarding the eitz being a chok - so what?  It was sui 
> generis, being as different from all of Taryag mitzvot as from mitzvot
> bnei noach. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
     
YGB
     
Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659 
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila
     
     
     
     

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


[ 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 ]