Avodah Mailing List

Volume 03 : Number 089

Sunday, June 13 1999

• Re: Avodah V3 #87
• R. Kook & korbanot... land for peace
• Re: Mehitsah
• vegetarianism
• definition of death
• definition of death
• science
• casearia
• Re: vegetarianism
• Re: definition of death
• Re: casearia
• Re: Faxes on Shabbos
• Re: Avos 4:21 questions

>Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 18:10:11 +0300 (GMT+0300)
>From: Eli Turkel <turkel@math.tau.ac.il>
>Subject: Re: Avodah V3 #86
>
>>
>> Again, there is no utility in paskening public policy; it's just an
>> exercise in futility.
>>
>I didn't understand this statement after Ginsberg himself showed how
>the psak of Rav Yosef will determine the vote of Shas.
>

a)  The spelling is Ginsb*U*rg.

b)  You can refer to me as Hershel or Heshy (either alone or together with
my last name - either is preferred over Ginsburg; if you insist on being
formal (not preferred, but I will accomodate), then it's Dr. Ginsburg.

c)  Let me clarify.  First, I was reacting in part to an earlier post, and
in part to a general phenomenon of those who state that it is absolutely
forbiden / mandated by Halacha to give up land for peace; clearly there are
respectable poskim on both sides of the issue.

Generally in halachic disputes, individuals can follow their chosen posek
more or less independently of the actions & decisions of others.  So I can
choose to avail myself of the Heter Mechira during shmitah and you can
choose not to; I can choose to carry in an Eiruv and you can choose not to.

In the case of the Land for Peace issue, only one decision can be made and
implemented.  Either Land is traded for Peace or it is not.  It can't be
both traded by me and not traded by you or vice versa.  Since the issue has
no clear cut, unequivocal halachic outcome, trying to prove what is the
absolute "right" answer to the question based on a halachic analysis is
futile, as the outcome depends on your choice of poskim and premises.

The deeper problem is that when one hears of Rabbanim or others in the name
of various Rabbanim who loudly trumpet that **THEIR** position is **THE**
Da'at Torah (or halacha l'ma'aseh or the real Emet or whatever absolutist
phraseology you prefer), oblivious to the fact that contradictory positions
are also being labelled as Da'at Torah etc., Halacha and the Halachic
process come out looking ridiculous to those listening on the side.
Unfortunately as the penchant for seeking and loudly proclaiming Da'at
Torah on public policy issues large and small has increased, the general
respect for Halacha & Torah & their proclaimed representatives has
decreased.

Heshy G.

P.S.  Since you (Eli Turkel) live in Israel, you may have noticed that
since the election, Rav Yosef has been acting more like a politician in
terms of trying to jockey Shas into better position vis a vis the Barak
government, and less like a posek above the political fray.


.............................................................................
                             Hershel Ginsburg, Ph.D.
              Licensed Patent Attorney and Biotechnology Consultant
                          P.O. Box 1058 / Rimon St. 27
                                  Efrat, 90435
                                    Israel
              Phone: 972-2-993-8134        FAX: 972-2-993-8122
                         e-mail: ginzy@netvision.net.il
.............................................................................

Moshe Feldman asks:
 
> What about other sections in tefillah, such as Musaf of Shabbat which
> says that may it be Hashem's will that when we return to our land we
> will bring the korban musaf consisting of 2 kevasim?

R. Kook presumably referred only to voluntary korbanot being limited to
vegetarian toda. (One imagines, as Tosafot argue, that hattaot and
ashamot will not be required in an eschatological world.) To deny the
restoration of temidim u-musafim would imply abrogation of the Torah. I
have no reason to impute such a notion to R. Kook.

Also, to list of major rabbanim who commend return of land ("up to and
including the kotel") for *genuine* peace, one must, of course, append
maran R. Yosef Soloveitchik zt"l.

I have just completed a series of Shiurim on Mehitsah and found it
astonishing that, to the best of my knowledge, none of the poskim deal
with the issue of mehitsah at Hakhel which is biblical, at which women
were obligated to attend, and which precedes the Simchat beit
HaShoevah.  Any sources or thoughts? One presumes they were all in the
same area (azarah). But there is no evidence that there was any
separation of the sexes.

> Question #2:  I heard that according to Rav Kook, Bayis Shlishi will be
> veegtarian and only korbon mincho will be offered.  Did Rav Kook advocte
> altering our tefillos and nusach to co-incide with his conviction?


As far as I know there is no proof that Rav Kook was a vegetarian or advocated vegetarianism.
I believe that these statements are misinterperpretations of Rav Kook.

Eli Turkel

> 18. All the problems of the defintion of death
>
> Again this is a partial list discussed through the ages with a variety
> of possible solutions. However "most" poskim do not simply say we accept
> chazal against modern science.
>

Huh?

How is this a scientific issue? Do scientists know when the soul leaves
the body?


> 18. All the problems of the defintion of death
>
> Again this is a partial list discussed through the ages with a variety
> of possible solutions. However "most" poskim do not simply say we accept
> chazal against modern science.
>

Huh?

How is this a scientific issue? Do scientists know when the soul leaves
the body?

>>

It is not even clear that the soul leaves at one instance.
Nevertheless, if one looks at many of the teshuvot on the definition
of death eg brainstem vs brain vs heart the question of the
scientific definition does enter, i.e. when is there no brain waves
and that it is terminal.

Eli Turkel

<< 
I would also say the scientific method is flawed by presuppositions.

EG, Someone told me that Darwin MUST be right about his theory because he spent
10-20 years going over his resrach with an eye to detail, and carefully checking
out all of his findings.

>>

Because somebody makes a statement does not make it science.
In fact Darwin's original theory is accepted by nobody today because of
advances in genetics. The debate about this is for some other time.

More important, is that as others have said that science is basically
governed by observation. The vast majority of things are agreed by
all scientists.

I find it very disturbing that some poskim use the fact that science changes
to "prove" that science cannot be relied on. On the contrary science does
not claim infallibility and is constantly improving itself. The fact that
the top level is changing does not imply that the foundation is weak.
Most things on my list are well known by observation and are not subject
to any debate.

To bring up some controversial topic to prove that science is not reliable
is not fair.

Eli Turkel

<< 
He is a Tanna that shows up mostly in Aggadata. In Katzrin, in the Golan,
the "Keisarin" of the Talmud (most scholars blew this one thinking it to
have been Caeseria) they found a lintel from a Beis Medrash that has
engraved in it: "Zehu Beis Medrasho shel R' Elazar HaKapor." Very moving
to see it!
>>

At least in many place I believe "Keisarin" was Caesaria.
Amoraim like Rav Abahu lived in Caesaria not Katzrin.

Eli Turkel

Nevertheless, thus he writes, in "Chazon Ha'Tzimchonut". he does not,
there, even draw RSC's logical distinction between voluntary and
obligatory korbonos. It is said that RK only ate meat on Shabbos.

On Sun, 13 Jun 1999, Eli Turkel wrote:

> As far as I know there is no proof that Rav Kook was a vegetarian or
> advocated vegetarianism.  I believe that these statements are
> misinterperpretations of Rav Kook. 
> 

YGB

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

On Sun, 13 Jun 1999, Eli Turkel wrote:

> It is not even clear that the soul leaves at one instance. 
> Nevertheless, if one looks at many of the teshuvot on the definition of
> death eg brainstem vs brain vs heart the question of the scientific
> definition does enter, i.e. when is there no brain waves and that it is
> terminal. 

That some Rabbonim think it is a scientific issue does not prove that it
is.

YGB

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

On Sun, 13 Jun 1999, Eli Turkel wrote:

> At least in many place I believe "Keisarin" was Caesaria.  Amoraim like
> Rav Abahu lived in Caesaria not Katzrin. 
>

I am no longer sure even about R' Abahu. But even if I concede that point,
the sphere of the Yerushalmi is far more indicative of Katzrin al pi rov
being Katzrin. 

YGB

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

<<
  In a similar manner--a piece of paper that received a fax message on
  it on shabbath has achieved a NEW STATUS--it no longer has the status
  of being a piece of BLANK paper but rather it has the status of a FAX
  Hence it is "BORN" and should not be read (till after Shabbath).
>>

Would chocolate syrup poured into milk on Shabbos create a "new" creation" of 
chocolate milk?

Eliyahu Teitz
Jewish Educational Center
Elizabeth, NJ

 On Fri, 11 Jun 1999, Michael Poppers wrote:
  
   (c) Who exactly is Rabbi Elazar HaKapor? and (d) are any other oral
 traditions/laws attributed to him? 

For references in Shaas and Medroshim, look in the Seder Hadorod under R' 
Elazar Ben Hakapor.

Kol Tuv

Yitzchok Zirkind
 

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


[ 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         ]