Avodah Mailing List

Volume 03 : Number 056

Tuesday, May 18 1999

• Re: Administrivia: List Rabbinic Authority
• Israelli Election Results
• Re: Rambam's ikarim
• Re: Informal Survey re: Eiruv Tavshillin
• Waiting for Mashi'ah
• Re: More about the Sho'ah commemorations
• Ikkarim
• Avodah vs. Milachah
• Rambam's ikkarim
• Shevuos Riddle - Answer
• R. Soloveitchik & Yom haAtzmaut
• Waiting for Mashi'ah
• How to Argue
• Re: Israelli Election Results
• Chodosh Ossur Min haTorah
• Re: Israelli Election Results
• Re: R. Soloveitchik & Yom haAtzmaut
• Daviry on Shevuos
• Re: Rambam's ikarim
• Re: Informal Survey re: Eiruv Tavshillin
• Re: Fwd: Rambam's ikarim

On Tue, 18 May 1999, Micha Berger wrote:

> R' YGB writes:
> : I am rolling out my old proposal for a "List Rabbinic Authority".
> 
> I've considered the idea, but I don't think it has much value. Usually
> these things go from non-existant to obviously out-of-hand in a matter
> of hours.  What poseik is going to be available in the middle of the
> afternoon? Aside from the problem that *I'm* not necessarily available
> in the middle of the afternoon. 
> 

No, no - bring the printouts of questionable discussions to the Rabbinic
Authority ex post facto, get his comments and rulings, and publicize
parameters.

> This brings me back to my original desire for everyone to receive Avodah
> in digest mode. Tempers have a chance to cool before replying. The
> non-instantaneousness of the dialogue encourages more forethought. 
> 

This may or may not help. But, what might help - if possible on the
majordomo software Avodah uses, is a header or footer tagline that reminds
everyone of the Darkei Noam guidelines: "Shivisi Darkei Noam Lefany
Tamid."

> Last, there's little to be gained by publically criticizing another
> person on the list. If you really think the person's out of bounds, your
> words are far more likely to be accepted if they were said in private.
> Handling it in a way that bruises kavod ha'adam is just an invitation to
> receive the same in response. If you don't feel comfortable writing the
> person, that's what I'm here for. And, odds are pretty high I did it
> already. 
> 

That may well be true, but there is a concept of "v'hanisharim yiru
v'yishma'u... v'lo yezidun od." B'didi ka'amina, that as a precondition to
my participation in Avodah, I am committed to the potential receipt of
public tochacha from the listowner so as to diminish future outbreaks of
Non-DN behavior. Good sporting (if not Mussar!) then requires me to carry
on and not be piqued.

YGB

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

Could one of our number please post the breakdown of seats in the new
Knesset? Please feel free to add your own analysis of coalition
possibilites. While Avodah is not normally the case for political
discussions, I think we can agree to a temporary dispensation!

YGB

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

I'm pretty sure the overwhelming majority of batei din ligeirus require belief
in the 13 ikkarim before they'd consider a candidate.

Jordan <TROMBAEDU@aol.com> writes:
: Didn't Saadia speak of 3 Ikkarim?

R' Saadia Gaon's ikkarim are different in kind than the Rambam. R'
Saadia Gaon lists three postulates from which one can conclude the rest
of Yahadus. The Rambam lists 13 things that distinguish Yahadus from other
faiths. For example seperating non-corporeality from unity was philosophically
unecessary. A body is composed of parts. Therefore an Absolute Unity could
not have a body. The ikkar about non-corporeality was probably written to be
anti-Christian. Similarly, the fact that HKBH doesn't change His "Mind" is
implied in the fact that He's "above" time. However, that ikkar is required
as a response to the Christian Bible and the Koran (as well as other texts
written since the Rambam's day).

I think that had the Rambam made a list of postulates, it wouldn't have gained
acceptance in any form. I could be wrong, though, just because they were
published in Peirush haMishnayos and not the Moreh.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 18-May-99: Shelishi
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H O"Ch 319:20-26
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Eruvin 82a
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         Kuzari II 41-44

In my house, I make the eiruv, but only once my wife stops everything and
listens -- much like process for being motzi another. That's not necessary,
though, since b'di'eved you can rely on a neighbor who included the city
when he spoke the formula. No?

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 18-May-99: Shelishi
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H O"Ch 319:20-26
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Eruvin 82a
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         Kuzari II 41-44

Regarding the question of whether we are obligated to expect Mashi'ah to
come today or not, I wrote:
..
>>Methodologically, I think we should focus on Rambam's own formulation,
>> rather than the simplistic and philosophically crude popularizations of

Our esteemed listowner demurs:
>I disagree. The Rambam's hashkafah is far from what we'd consider normative
>today. OTOH, Ani Ma'amin and Yigdal do have the haskamah of the masses. It's
>not clear that we, when we accepted the 12th ikar emunah, actually accepted
>all the connotations of the original. I'd argue that the "popularizations"
>are therefore more authoritative than the original.

I find this very difficult to understand, on several levels.  Rambam's
theology, you say, is not normative, but Ani Ma'amin and Yigdal are,
because they have the haskamah of the masses.

Now, let us put aside what Rambam himself thought of the masses.  The
question is: where does theological authority in Judaism come from?
Your answer seems to be that it comes from popular consensus.  This is
news to me.  Have you a source for this?

I would have said that the answer depends on a number of factors.
According to the school that views theology as a subset of Halakhah,
theological authority is no different from halakhic authority.  Hence,
theological questions, like all halakhic questions, require a posek.
While popular acceptance does figure in halakhic issues with respect to
takkanot, minhag and the resolution of certain disputes, it never rises
to the establishment of fundamental halakhic principles.  According to
this school, then, we would look to our posekim on matters of
philosophy, not to the masses.  Given that the authors of Yigdal and Ani
Ma'amin are utterly anonymous, I would be wary of turning them into
halakhic authorities.

According to the school that views theology as independent of Halakhah,
it is even less likely that the masses matter.  Theology must be
developed based on the biblical and talmudic sources.  It does not
matter what the masses think; if the masses believe in shedim, would
that become normative?

More fundamentally, by cutting yourself off from Rambam, you have
detached the limb on which you sit from the trunk of the tree.  Rambam
pretty much invented the notion that there is such a thing as normative
theology.  If you reject him, consistency requires that you reject the
concept that we are obligated to believe in certain dogmas.  In which
case, this entire thread disappears in a poof.

But even if we decide to embrace inconsistency and posit a normative
theology independent of Rambam, I don't understand why the masses should
be decisive.  At a minimum, their theology is likely to be unsystematic
and lacking in logical coherence.  Moreover, it is based largely on what
has been absorbed ad hoc from a hodgepodge of sources, including
(horrors!) their second grade teachers (probably the largest source of
Jewish misinformation).

But you are not suggesting a normative theology independent of Rambam.
You are suggesting that we have 13 ikkkarei emunah -- which happen to
based on Rambam's formulation, but have been modified.  Who modified
them?  We don't know.  Why were they modified?  Well, in the case of
Yigdal, they were modified in order to preserve the meter and rhyme
scheme of the piyyut.  Forgive me, but this sounds a little bit like
arguing that our national anthem should be seen as modifying the U.S.
Constitution.

Finally, it is not at all clear to me that Yigdal has the haskamah of
the masses as a theological document.  It seems to me that it is seen
primarily as a part of the liturgy to be sung more or less tunefully by
a very cute nine-year old boy.  And, for most worshippers, their
appreciation of the meaning of the words probably has not deepened much
since age nine.  This is not a criticism of Yigdal.  How many people pay
close attention to the lyricism of Anim Zemirot?  Or even the soaring
imagery of Alenu?  But, with respect to Yigdal, I think it dilutes the
theological aspects of the masses' "haskamah."

Kol tuv,

Eli Clark

Does anyone know how long it was between the massacres of the Crusades and
the creation of "Av haRachamim" and the change in Omer observance? R' Zvi
Weiss notes that "we are starting now ... to include kinnot on 9-Av or other
such 'observances'" in response to the holocaust. I'm wondering if the
response to the Crusades was any more rapid.

Just because telecommunications makes it technically possible to respond more
rapidly doesn't mean we're emotionally able to, or that the halachic process
runs faster.

A similar argument arose in my oft-mentioned discussions with Conservative
Jews. Are we really moving slower on the agunah issue than they did in creating
the "heter iska"? The autonomous community fell less than a century ago. How
long did poor people have to live without loans because no one would lend them
money without interest?

History has a way of telescoping time.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 18-May-99: Shelishi
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H O"Ch 319:20-26
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Eruvin 82a
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         Kuzari II 41-44

Jordan:>>Didn't Saadia speak of 3 Ikkarim?<<
Perhaps, Albo Defintiely cited (just?) 3 Ikkarim in his sefer Sefar haikkarim!

Rich Wolpoe

In his parting comment, R' Moshe Feldman writes:
: Kol tuv (and back to an "avodah" which pays the bills!),

(Well, we could argue whether the job pays the bills. I think the point of
sh'mittah is that the point of working is to provide the means by which
HKBH pays them.)

The Torah calls your job both "avodah" and "melachah" -- "sheishes yamim
ta'avod, vi'asisa kol milachtecha". What's prohibited on Shabbos is melachah,
not avodah. Shas consistantly refers to a profession as "melachah".

Hirsch understands "melachah" to be "creative work". Which fits a job -- you
produce wealth by making something new, providing a service, etc...

All this got me wondering, though, why avodas Hashem is called "avodah", but
not "melachah". Any ideas?

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 18-May-99: Shelishi
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H O"Ch 319:20-26
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Eruvin 82a
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         Kuzari II 41-44

Sholem Berger asks:

>When did the thirteen ikarim become accepted as the litmus test for
theological orthodoxy?  What did >Jews consider the core of their
theology before the Rambam?  If one isn't an Aristotelean (like most of
>us nowadays), are there other acceptable (=normative) options?  For
example, I probably believe >something _on the order of_ "hu rishon
vehu akharon", but not in the sense of "primum mobile," because >I
don't consider it necessary to classify God as a "mover," whether
primary or otherwise.

The question is an excellent one.  The historical answer to your
question is the nineteenth century, with the rise of heterodox
movements.  But even then it was not really accepted as written.  A
brand new book has been published by Menahem Kellner, "Must A Jew
Believe Anything?" which demonstrates that the Orthodox community uses
the 13 Ikkarim in order to brand the non-Orthodox movements as heresy,
but does not really accept them as ikkarim in the Maimonidean sense.

For Rambam, if you don't believe in the ikkarim, then you lose your olam
ha-ba automatically.  This is true even if you were a shogeg.  (Kellner
explains that this absolute rule might be limited only to the first five
ikkarim.)  This absolutism is based on Rambam's belief (rooted in
Aristotelianism) that one can prove the ikkarim true.  For this reason,
he starts the Mishneh Torah with the requirement that one "know" that
Hashem is one, rather than believe it.

As Sholem writes, not too many of us are Aristotelians today.  Kellner
concludes, therefore, that the Orthodox community's use of the 13
ikkarim represents an embrace of the kelipah of Rambam, and leaving the
essence behind.

Kol tuv,

Eli Clark

Answer from:
Ohr Somayach
www.ohrnet.org
info@ohr.org.ilform 


     They have two forms: middle and final. This characteristic is shared by the 
     letters "tsadi, peh and kaf."

     Their names begin and end with the same letter. This characteristic is 
     shared by the letter "vav." (The letter "hey" is normally spelled "hey 
     alef.")

     They both require use of the nostrils to be pronounced. If you have a 
     stuffed nose, every "man" is "bad." (see Radak in Michlol, Lyck edition, 
     pg. 70a)

Rich Wolpoe

To clear up possible misunderstanding:

The Rav flatly opposed, on halakhic grounds, recitation of a brakha on the
Hallel of Yom haAtzmaut. His written teshuva (unpublished) to the RCA
permits Hallel without a brakha during the day, with the warning that
rabbis should not impose the Hallel in the absence of popular support. He
had objections to recitation of Hallel on the night of Yom haAtzmaut.
These were minor, compared to the problem of brakha l'battala. Hence he
advised rabbis not to fight the evening Hallel if the congregation really
wanted it, but to resist the recitation of the brakha in any event.

RYZ writes:

>Actually there is a mistake in the translation, the Rambam writes that one
>should not think that it will be a long time (please see inside).

>Just for clarification I am giving a free translation of the Sefer Beis
>E-lokin to the Mabit in Shaar Hayisodos chapter 50 (as not all have this
>Sefer I will not rely just on a Mareh Mokom).

>....and therefore the Rav [Rambam] Z"L warned in the belief and the assertion
>that he will come and not to think that he will come in a long time "Im
>Yismahmeiah Chakei Loi" (as the Novae Chvakuk says), for that which his time
>was not set [is because it] can be at any time close or distant AND ONE WHO
>DOESN'T BELIEVE FOR THE CLOSE TIME WILL ALSO NOT BELIEVE FOR THE DISTANT
>TIME,

<rest snipped>

I am grateful for this source.  It is one with which I am not familiar.
Could I trouble you to tell us a little bit about the sefer you are
quoting?

As a side point, the translation I quoted is from the Arabic original,
and I am in no position to judge its accuracy.  But the passage you have
quoted seems to be more of a perush, so I do not really understand why
this perush is evidence of an erroneous translation.

Kol tuv,

Eli Clark 

Some timely advice from Rav Pliskin re: HOW to argue.
Rich Wolpoe

______________________________ Forward Header __________________________________
DAILY LIFT #312

TOPIC: ARGUMENTS

Learn to disagree without creating an unpleasant argument. 

A mature disagreement is when two people both listen carefully to the other's 
position in order to understand the position and why the person feels that way. 

The Torah obligates us to treat each person with respect - even if you disagree.

...
DAILY LIFT #313
...
Whenever you argue with someone, keep the argument limited to 
the issue at hand. Refrain from bringing in other matters which 
increase the emotional intensity. 

(See Rabbi Pliskin's Gateway to Self Knowledge, pp.125-7)

	In response to Rabbi Bechhofer's request, I am posting the
following, which was e-mailed to me by the webmaster of Virtual Jerusalem's
website.  Scroll down to get seat breakdowns.  This is slightly different
from what I saw on CNN's website last night.  I think the coalition building
will be interesting.   As I receive more current information, I will post it
if members of the chevra are interested. 

	//Avi
	Avram Sacks
	Chicago, IL
	sacksa@cch.com

	--------------------------  E L E C T I O N S  U P D A T E
-----------------------

	     Barak has won the Israeli Prime Ministerial race.

	The exit poll, representing a sample of approximately 1/3 of the
vote, shows
	the following result as of 03:00 IST:

	Ehud Barak:  56.4%
	Benjamin Netanyahu :  43.6%

	Speaking at his first press conference at 2.30am IST, he wished
Netanyahu
	"all the best in everything that awaits him". Referring to those who
did not
	vote for him, Barak said that "from now on, we are all together. We
are all
	one people".

	He stated that it "is my intention to be everyone's Prime Minister,
whatever
	our differences, we are all brothers, and brothers go together".  He
also
	said that "all of Israel is responsible for each other" including
religious,
	secular, Arab, Druze, immigrants, Sephardim and Ashkanazim.
"Everyone,
	Everyone, is part of Israel!" he emphasized.

	He paid tribute to Yitchak Rabin, saying that "if Yitchak is looking
down on
	us from Heaven, I'm sure he is proud of us and knows that we will
fulfil his
	legacy. He said his government would not flinch to take decisions
that will
	lead to security and peace for Israel. He ended his address by
citing a
	prayer from the Yom Kippur service: "May the Lord protect us and
give us
	peace. May this be His will."



	     Parties Results (Also representing 1/3 of the votes counted):

	One Israel 29 mandates
	Likud 18
	Shas 16
	Meretz 11
	United Torah Judaism 6
	Shinui 6
	Yisrael B'Aliyah 6
	Center 6
	National Religious (NRP) 5
	National Unity 4
	National Democratic Alliance (Balad) 4
	Yisrael Beteinu 3
	One Nation 2
	Hadash 2

	Keeping up with the latest election news and final results:
	http://www.vjnews.com/elections99/



	From:	"Shoshanah M. & Yosef G. Bechhofer"
<sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu> on 05/18/99 09:01 AM EDT
	To:	Highlevel Torah Discussion Group
<avodah@aishdas.org>@SMTP@cchntmsd
	cc:	Hershel Ginsburg <ginzy@netvision.net.il>@SMTP@cchntmsd 

	Subject:	Israelli Election Results

	Could one of our number please post the breakdown of seats in the
new
	Knesset? Please feel free to add your own analysis of coalition
	possibilites. While Avodah is not normally the case for political
	discussions, I think we can agree to a temporary dispensation!

	YGB

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

I have often wondered, would Torah Judaism had been more creative,. innovative 
(within the bounds of halacha) had their never been a Reform or Secular Jewish 
movements?  Would poskim have felt freer to issue forthright takkanos (eg 
pre-nups) if the vast majority of Jews adhered to Halocho?


Rich Wolpoe

--- Avram Sacks  wrote:
> 
> 	     Parties Results (Also representing 1/3 of the votes counted):
> 
> 	One Israel 29 mandates
> 	Likud 18
> 	Shas 16
> 	Meretz 11
> 	United Torah Judaism 6
> 	Shinui 6
> 	Yisrael B'Aliyah 6
> 	Center 6
> 	National Religious (NRP) 5
> 	National Unity 4
> 	National Democratic Alliance (Balad) 4
> 	Yisrael Beteinu 3
> 	One Nation 2
> 	Hadash 2
> 
Where can I find a comparison of these results with the composition
of the outgoing Knesset?

Thanks.
Moshe
_____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Free instant messaging and more at http://messenger.yahoo.com

Is this tshuva available somewhere?

Ari Zivotofsky



Shalom Carmy wrote:

> The Rav flatly opposed, on halakhic grounds, recitation of a brakha on the
> Hallel of Yom haAtzmaut. His written teshuva (unpublished) to the RCA .....
>

KSA 103:7 mentions a remez for eating dairy on Shevuos

Mincho CHadosho Lashem Beshovuoseichem

Rosehei Teivos mecholov.

Questions:
What are the earliest sources for this minhog?
KSA says meat is required even on Sh'vuos. Are there any poskim that argue and 
say that dairy is sufficient?

Rich Wolpoe

In a message dated 5/18/99 10:09:34 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
micha@aishdas.org writes:

<< I think that had the Rambam made a list of postulates, it wouldn't have 
gained
 acceptance in any form. I could be wrong, though, just because they were
 published in Peirush haMishnayos and not the Moreh.
  >>

First of all, thank you for addressing my question. Second, I can't remember 
offhand the exact Perek, but the Rambam also discusses the 13 Ikkarim in 
terms of how they relate to various forms of heresy in Hilchos Tshuvah. 
(Incidentally, I had the pleasure of hearing list member Moshe Rayman give a 
shiur on this topic recently at Cong. Rinat Yisrael in Teaneck). He 
formulates them there in categories relating to the various ways one can be a 
Heretic.

Jordan

In a message dated 5/18/99 10:14:36 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
micha@aishdas.org writes:

<< 
 In my house, I make the eiruv, but only once my wife stops everything and
 listens -- much like process for being motzi another. That's not necessary,
 though, since b'di'eved you can rely on a neighbor who included the city
 when he spoke the formula. No? >>

Machlokes Haposkim as to whether you can rely on that more than once. I will 
try to get the sources.

Jordan

I'm forwarding this from Rav Sholom Kamenetsky:
>  
> Take a look at a fascinating responsa from the Chasam Sofer Yoreh
> Deyah
> #356 about belief in the coming of Moshiach. See also the first
> mitzvah
> in the Sefer HaMitzvos HaKatzer (the first mitzvah) that clearly
> disagrees.  In general, the normative "other view" is the Sefer
> Ikarim. 
> The best resource for the questioner is the book edited by Rabbi J.
> D.
> Bleich on the principles.
> 
> Sholom
>
_____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Free instant messaging and more at http://messenger.yahoo.com

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


[ 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         ]