Avodah Mailing List
Volume 03 : Number 019
Wednesday, April 14 1999
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 10:08:30 -0400
From: "Pechman, Abraham" <APechman@mwellp.com>
Subject: RE: Albanians
> -----Original Message-----
> From: micha@aishdas.org [mailto:micha@aishdas.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 1999 9:57 AM
> To: avodah@aishdas.org
> Subject: Re: Albanians
>
>
> WRT helping the Albanians, Sholem Berger writes:
> : What does "tov hashem al kol, verakhamav al kol maysov"
> mean? Is there some
> : hidden meaning to "kol" I'm not aware of here so that it
> does not apply to
> : Kosovo?
>
> Perhaps if one could prove that a given Kosover was an SS man
> (and there is no
> indication that he had charata about it in the past
> half-century) the midah of
Why would charata be an issue? Is teshuva available to non-Jews? Doesn't the
sugya in Sanhedrin re: 7 mitzvos imply that it's not?
Avi Pechman
Go to top.
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 10:59:30 -0400
From: David Glasner <DGLASNER@FTC.GOV>
Subject: Re: more on the haughtiness of the Academy
Rabbi Bechhoffer wrote:
<<<
> Okay, but then why raise the issue of the Academy? Are you saying that
> in halachah l'ma'asseh academically oriented talmidei hahamim do not
> adequately defer to the precedent of earlier poskim? The whole thread,
Yes.
> or more accurately, the most recent variant of this thread, started, I
> think, when Eli Turkel noted the difficulties involved in too literal an
> interpretation of yeridat ha-dorot. That observation seems to have
> inspired you to set up a grand dichotomy between Yeshiva and Academy.
Right, and I continue - our friendships here notwithstanding - to maintain
it.
> Without being so bold as to speak on behalf of the Academy side, I would
> venture to say that your criticism was interpreted as being more
> far-reaching than merely a failure to preface any statement of
> disagreement or criticism of sages of earlier generations with the words
> b'mehilat k'vod torahto(tam).
>
Right, it is more far-raching than that!
>>>
Well, b'mehilat k'vod toratkha, lo zakhiti l'havin da'at kodshekha. I think we need some concrete examples here rather than sweeping generalizations about the attitudes of an entire collection of rather disparate people.
<<<
> You have once again, wittingly or unwittingly, exposed the very limited
> boundaries of my knowledge. Since I have only read the hakdamah of Ohr
> Bahir, I don't know what the issue in dispute was, except that I believe
> that the Dor Revi'i refers at some point to an opinion of the Divrei
> Haim that mayim zohalin were necessary for a mikvah. Maybe I can get
> back to you in a few years when I hope to have gotten around to reading
> the sefer itself.
Mayim zochalim passel a mikva (l'kulei alma). The DC passels the Chabad
mikva'os - introduced, I believe, by the Tzemach Tzedek, of bor al gabei
bor because the water may be regarded as flowing from upper bor to lower
bor. It seems your illustrious forbear was coming to defend a mikva built
to Chabad-style specifications.
>>>
Now that is a cheap shot if I ever saw one. As best as I can determine from a quick and not very informed perusal of the actual text of the work, the main issues involved were whether zohalin is biblically or rabbinically prohibited, whether the prohibition requires an actual flow of water or merely dripping, the circumstances in which zohalin invalidate a mikvah, and the manner in which a zohalin problem may be remedied. The issue of bor al gabbei bor did not arise as best as I can tell, though I could easily be mistaken on that, nor is the name Tzemach Tzedek so much as mentioned, though I could be wrong about that too. The prior authority whom the Dor Revi'i was defending against the attacks of the Divrei Haim was the Hatam Sofer, not the Tzemach Tzedek.
David Glasner
dglasner@ftc.gov
!
!
!
!
!
!
Go to top.
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 12:42:10 -0400
From: richard_wolpoe@ibi.com
Subject: 49/50 Molei/Choser Exact/Aprroximate
Micha:>>> 5. 3 Marcheshvan (Tal u'Motor in Israel) until Chanuko.
> 6. Chanuko until Tu biShvat
Don't these two depend on the year, as Marcheshvan and Kislev are of variable
length?<<
Ein hochi nami, and wouldn't Shavuos also vary if Iyyar were Molei?
Wasn't the very first Shavuos was on a Friday?
Q: was that Friday 5 Sivvan or 6 Sivvan?
And if Moshe Rabbinu was hosif yom ehcod mida'ato and matan Torah was on
shabbbos..
Then
1) Friday was Shavuos and was 5 Sivvan
2) Mattan torah was on Shabbos and was 6 Sivan
3) That year BOTH Nissan and Iyyar were molei...
(I don't recall the source, since I heard this about 30 years ago....)
Therefore:
Point #1 in the time of kiddush al pi reiyo (IOW until circa 350 CE) any month
could be molei or chosser
Point #2 if I did not use the word approxmiate, let me re-iterate that all those
49/50 days periods can be considred approximations.
Rich Wolpoe
Go to top.
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 12:44:59 -0400
From: richard_wolpoe@ibi.com
Subject: Kiddusho Rabbo
The pesukkim for Kiddusho Rabbo are strictly optional (at leats according to
most opinions) and vary according to minhog. Note that on Shabbos some say
Mizmor Ledovid and/o Im Toshiv prir to v'shomru.
Bottom line the ikkar is the Brocho, and not the pesukkim. (and some say zero
persukkim)
Rich Wolpoe
Go to top.
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 12:36:24 -0400 (EDT)
From: micha@aishdas.org (Micha Berger)
Subject: Teshuvah and non-Jews (was: Albanians)
Without knowing which sugya in Sanhedrin Avi Pechman is referring to, this
answer may be totally off base. But...
: Why would charata be an issue? Is teshuva available to non-Jews? Doesn't the
: sugya in Sanhedrin re: 7 mitzvos imply that it's not?
Some of the examples we find of teshuvah in aggadita are Hagar/Keturah,
Yishmael and Esav -- non-Jews, not even proto-Jews.
There are two inyanim when it comes to teshuva: 1- the chiyuv, 2- the ability to
undo the past. Are you sure the gemara is saying that teshuvah is unavailable
to non-Jews as a means of returning to G-d, as opposed to ruling out the idea
that they have a particular mitzvah of teshuvah?
-mi
--
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287 MMG"H for 13-Apr-99: Shelishi, Sazria-Metzora
micha@aishdas.org A"H O"Ch 311:10-16
http://www.aishdas.org Eruvin 64b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light. Kuzari I 81-84
Go to top.
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 13:22:12 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Shoshanah M. & Yosef G. Bechhofer" <sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>
Subject: Re: Re[2]: RYEH, RYYH, CI, and the date line
On Mon, 12 Apr 1999 meir_shinnar@smtplink.mssm.edu wrote:
> There is a statement in shut Bnei Banim II, p. 209, about RYEH, CI, and
> the date line, but it seems substantially different than your post, (the
> CI doesn't retract, although RYEH is clearly upset by the psak, and
> viees it at the CI's big error), and the statement was not made to RYHH
> but to another), which made me wonder if there was another source. Meir
> Shinnar
>
Perhaps when he pubkished the Shut he toned it down, but in the Heichal
Shlomo Shana b'Shana 5739 p. 407 he writes that the CI "nischaret b'sof
yamav" - ayain sham.
YGB
Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila
Go to top.
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 13:30:53 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Shoshanah M. & Yosef G. Bechhofer" <sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>
Subject: Re: more on the haughtiness of the Academy
On Tue, 13 Apr 1999, David Glasner wrote:
> Well, b'mehilat k'vod toratkha, lo zakhiti l'havin da'at kodshekha. I
> think we need some concrete examples here rather than sweeping
> generalizations about the attitudes of an entire collection of rather
> disparate people.
>
It can pass for now. No one else seems interested.
> <<< Mayim zochalim passel a mikva (l'kulei alma). The DC passels the
> Chabad mikva'os - introduced, I believe, by the Tzemach Tzedek, of bor
> al gabei bor because the water may be regarded as flowing from upper bor
> to lower bor. It seems your illustrious forbear was coming to defend a
> mikva built to Chabad-style specifications. >>>
>
> Now that is a cheap shot if I ever saw one. As best as I can determine
> from a quick and not very informed perusal of the actual text of the
> work, the main issues involved were whether zohalin is biblically or
> rabbinically prohibited, whether the prohibition requires an actual flow
> of water or merely dripping, the circumstances in which zohalin
> invalidate a mikvah, and the manner in which a zohalin problem may be
> remedied. The issue of bor al gabbei bor did not arise as best as I can
> tell, though I could easily be mistaken on that, nor is the name Tzemach
> Tzedek so much as mentioned, though I could be wrong about that too.
> The prior authority whom the Dor Revi'i was defending against the
> attacks of the Divrei Haim was the Hatam Sofer, not the Tzemach Tzedek.
>
> David Glasner
> dglasner@ftc.gov
As an individual with distinguished Chabad yichus, I take umbrage at your
implication that you were insulted by my saying the DR was defending as
mikva built to Chabad specs! (Follow that?)
It still seems, from your expanded description, that that is the nidon.
But if not, not.
YGB
Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila
Go to top.
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 19:13:20 -0400
From: Harry Maryles <C-Maryles@neiu.edu>
Subject: Smicha from Chevron
Shoshanah M. & Yosef G. Bechhofer wrote:
>
> > But we can only testify that both Harav Menachem Elon (A musmach of
> > Hevron Yeshivah) and Rav Yehudah Herzl Henkin are serious Talmidei
>
> Sorry to quibble, but I do not believe Chevron gives Semicha!
As long as everyone seems to be quibbling (Great word! Isn't it?) My
very good friend, R. Zvi Block, of L.A. received smicha from R. Chaskel
Sarna, famed Rosh Hayeshiva of Chevron. Yoreh, Yoreh, and Yadin, Yadin.
HM
Go to top.
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 20:33:14 -0400
From: Harry Maryles <C-Maryles@neiu.edu>
Subject: Bein Adam LaMokom
>frumkeit is measured in the realm of Bein
> Adam LaMakom, never in the realm of Bein Adam L'Chavero. With the
>notable
> exception of groups that study Shmirat Halashon, I have never heard of
>any
> Hitorarut ever dedicated to encouraging the adoption of Chumrot
>(assuming
> they exist) in the realm of Bein Adam L'Chavero.
If I can recall it correctly, I would like to relate an interesting
pshat I heard from R. Eliahu Soloveichik on the concept of Naval
BeReshus Hatorah as it relates to last week's parsha. The question was
raised as to why the zkainim were called in to listen to Hashem direct
Aaron in the Kehuna Gedolah. He answered that Zkainim are always brought
in to remind us of our Mesorah. But, What Mesorah? the Torah had just
been given. Prior to that there was no Mesorah. After all don't we begin
our Mesorah with the Torah itself? Don't we start Pirkei Avos with the
words Moshe Kibel Torah MiSinai, Umasrah...LEZKAINIM? The answer is
that, indeed we do have a Mesorah before Maamid Har Sinau... the Mesorah
of the Avos. True the Torah shebeksav, veshebalpeh tells us the
specifics of Halacha, (both bein Adam LaMokom and bein Adam LeChaveiro).
But the Avos teach us how to behave even when there were no specifics.
The point of Hashem bringing the zkainim to hear His directive to Aaron
is to teach you that there is a way of acting that goes beyond the
LETTER of the law that is just as Halachicly mandated as the letter of
the law. The concept of being a Naval Bereshus HaTorah does not mean
one is allowed to act in a disgusting manner just because the letter of
the law doesn't EXPRESSLY forbid it. It is still forbidden to act in
this way. This is what is pointed out by the expression Kedoshim Tihiyu.
And, this is why the Zkaynim were brought out that day...to tell us of
the Mesorah of the Avos.
This ends R. Eliahu's point, as I recall it.
Being a Naval Berushus Hatorah is Assur. This means that there is a
higher ethical plane that the Torah mandates in addition to Halacha. The
Torah directs us to be holy. Naval BeReshus HaTorah does not mean that
the Torah gives us permission (reshus) to be disgusting in certain
cases. It tells us to be a holy nation and to address all matters
ethically. This should include Ecology and caring about our
environment. It behooves all of us to pay attention to these matters.
HM
Go to top.
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 23:27:38 -0400
From: Joel Margolies <margol@ms.com>
Subject: please keep this name in mind when you learn/daven
Hi All,
My wife's cousin gave birth to healthy twin boys last tuesday.
Unfortunately there were major complications during birth and the mother
lost a lot of blood. Additionally, her liver, kidneys and lungs shut
down due to an as yet undiagnosed infection. On top of that it seems
that she may have contracted pneumonia as well. Baruch Hashem her
organs have begun to respond a little to the doses of high power
anti-biotics but she is still in critical condition in sha'arey tzedek
hospital. If you all could say an extra tefilah for Tzipporah leah bas
chaya, we would really appreciate it.
Thanks a lot.
Take care,
Joel
--
Joel
Margolies
margol@ms.com
W-212-761-1404
Go to top.
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 11:28:54 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Turkel <turkel@math.tau.ac.il>
Subject: Albania
>
> I was quite disturbed by Josh's posting re: Jews of Albania (Avodah V3 #17)
> in which the entire analysis boiled down to "mishum eiva". The fact that
> "there are no Jews in Albania" that would invoke "mefarnasim aniyei akum im
> aniyei Yisrael .. mipnei
> darchei shalom" is a very narrow reading of the obligation. Is the makom
> defined by the borders of Albania, or is the makom here the world and the
> world's perception of the Jewish response. Modern communication has expanded
> local borders and so then technically mishum eiva might still apply. That
> being said, the corrective of "Hillul haShem" is at play.
>
According to todays papers R. Ovadiah Yosef wrote a personal letter to the
pope !!! asking him to intervene to help establish peace in Kosova.
The paper said that the contents were very personal and not for publication.
Eli Turkel
Go to top.
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 14:13:41 -0400
From: saul guberman <saulguberman@juno.com>
Subject: ecology
The OU has put an article on their web site about earth day from a
jewish perspective. Their director of education haas written a book on
the subject.
Saul
April 13, 1999 ECO-MYSTICISM:KABBALISTIC PERSPECTIVES ON EARTH DAY
Why pollution, non-biodegradable materials and nuclear waste are not
just bad for the environment; they're bad for your soul.
With Earth Day just around the corner, Rabbi Yaacov Haber, Director of
Jewish Education at the Orthodox Union, compiled some compelling thoughts
on environmentalism from the sacred Jewish writings.
Rabbi Aryeh Levine recounted: "After Mincha (the afternoon service) my
teacher (Rav Kook), as was his custom, set out on a walk in order to
focus his thoughts. I accompanied him. On the way I plucked a flower. He
trembled and said to me softly: `Believe me, I have always been careful
not to purposelessly pluck a blade of grass or a flower which could grow
and develop; for there is no grass from below that does not have a Mazel
(force from above) imploring it `Grow!.' Each blade of grass says
something, each stone whispers a secret, each creature utters a song."
Malachim Kivnei Adam,
Simcha Raz.
G-d took Adam "...and placed him in the Garden of Eden, to cultivate it
and to protect it." Genesis 2:15
When the Holy One, blessed be He, created the first man, He took him and
had him pass before all the trees of the Garden of Eden, and said to him:
"Do you see My handiwork, how fine and excellent they are! All that I
created was created for you. Be careful not to ruin and destroy My world,
for if you do, there will be no one to repair it after you." Kohelet
Rabbah
Not yours is the earth, but you belong to the earth, to respect it as
Divine soil and to deem every one of its creatures, a creature of G-d, as
your fellow being. Consider the things around you. I lent them to you
for wise use only; never forget that I lent them to you. As soon as you
use them unwisely, be it the greatest or the smallest, you commit
treachery against My world, you commit murder and robbery against My
property, you sin against Me!" This is what G-d calls unto you.... Rabbi
Samson Raphael Hirsch, Nineteen Letters
Everything is full of riches and greatness, everything aspires to ascend,
to be purified and to be elevated. Everything recites a song, offers
praise, magnifies, exalts; everything builds, serves, perfects, elevates,
and aspires to unite and to be integrated... The realization dawns on us
that were it not for the lower beings, the uncouth and the unseemly, the
higher beings could not have emerged in their splendor, their esteem and
their luminous quality. Thus, we continually become more conscious of the
integration and unity of existence. Rav Abraham Isaac Kook, 20th Century
Palestine; Orot Hakodesh II: 386, 431
Editors: If you would like to receive a complimentary copy of a source
book on ecology and Judaism written
by Rabbi Haber, please call (212) 613-8321.
___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
Go to top.
********************
[ Distributed to the Avodah mailing list, digested version. ]
[ To post: mail to avodah@aishdas.org ]
[ For back issues: mail "get avodah-digest vXX.nYYY" to majordomo@aishdas.org ]
[ or, the archive can be found at http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/ ]
[ For general requests: mail the word "help" to majordomo@aishdas.org ]