Avodah Mailing List

Volume 03 : Number 113

Tuesday, July 6 1999

• Gemarah study in high school
• thinking for oneself
• RE: Chareidi Schools and Gemoro (V3 #112)
• Dorming (was: Chareidi Schools and Gemoro (V3 #112))
• Re: TIDE (was "Re: Dante and fervor")
• Re: TIDE (was "Re: Dante and fervor")
• Re: TIDE
• RE: Rabbi Yaakov Weinberg zt"l
• baale teshuvah
• baa tshuva movements
• Being Mahmir on Hazal -- What About Pesulei Shehitah?
• Differences between R. Soloveitchik and R. Lichtenstein
• Pro-secular studies schools of thought
• Re: R. Soloveitchik & liberal arts
• Re: thinking for oneself
• Birchas haTorah on thinking Torah
• Re: Being Mahmir on Hazal -- What About Pesulei Shehitah?

Someone wrote me offlist:

> >From what I understand, a typical student in *most* (there are
> some
> exceptions) yeshivos, by the time he finishes high school he will
> have
> spent about ten times as much time on Gemara as on Chayei Adam and
> Kitzur, and about ten times as much on them as on Beis Yosef, Magen
> Avraham, Mishna Brurah, and similar works.
> 
> Does anyone really believc that one can get "a proper understanding
> of
> Halacha" without actually studying Halacha to any depth at all?

As I noted in one of my posts, I do not defend the current system.  I
believe that Gemarah should be studied at much later point in a
talmid's development (after mastery of tanach & mishna).  Certainly,
halacha should be studied directly (i.e., rather than just Gemarah). 
The question is whether it is done intensively from the very
beginning, or only after a talmid has become a lamdan.  Of course,
this depends upon how much time the talmid has to devote to Torah
study.  

My vote is to have different curricula for (1) those who intend to
study in Yeshivot Gedolot for a number of years post-high school, as
opposed to (2) those who intend to spend no more than a year in
Israel and then go to a secular college.

Ideally, an intense Gemarah education in Nezikin should prepare the
talmid with the necessary tools to truly study halacha in depth.

Kol tuv,
Moshe


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

RYGB writes

<<
The reality is, in fact, that most people of all stripes are not
interested in "thinking." Thinking is nerve-wracking, tension-provoking
and anxiety-causing. Angst is only fun for existentialists. I venture with
confidence that the proportion of "thinkers" in neither camp is greater
than in the other. Which is why we are all here, of course, to overcome
that deficit amongst ourselves.
>>

Rav Soloveitchik always stressed that the purpose of religion was
not to make life simple. That true religion is nerve-wracking etc.
 As to the number of thinkers in each camp, I leave that to the sociologists.
My point was that many people in the hareidi community are in
principle opposed to the idea of thinking for themselves.

Having said that I have a major problem with many MO. I have been
to many discussions in which everyone ventures an opinion without
any knowledge. It is rare for anyone to ask me if there is anything
in the rabbinic literature, everyone believes he knows better.

Rav Moshe stressed that he didn't want people to accept him on faith.
On the other hand he wasn't interested in people who wanted to argue
with him but did not know the Schach/Taz/magen Avraham etc.
Thus, thinking is important but only if based on knowledge.

Eli Turkel

>>Date: Tue, 6 Jul 1999 10:00:58 -0400
>>From: richard_wolpoe@ibi.com 
>>Subject: Chareidi Schools and Gemoro

>>5) While I do not intend to flame anyone, I do question the motivation, >>and sincecrity and commitment about those who wish to keep their >>children home and not send them away.  Undoubtedly. as first noted, >>some children are not suited fro dromitory schools, however, I think that >>there is a lot of rationalization taking place, too.  Is it flaming or just >>mussar/hashkofo to point this out?!

I feel that some dormitory schools are not suited for children.
In a shmooze/chabura ( topic: drop outs; audience: ex yungeleit mostly professionals whose children are not yet teens) given by a well respected Rebbe from an out of town yeshiva,  he said "The worst home is better than the best dorm". While he admitted it was an exaggeration, I personally, based on my experiences as someone who dormed during high school in one highly respected yeshiva  and a dorm counselor in another, will first look for an in-town high school for my sons before sending them to a dormitory yeshiva.

Sender Baruch

--- Allen Baruch <Abaruch@SINAI-BALT.COM> wrote:
> I feel that some dormitory schools are not suited for children.
> In a shmooze/chabura ( topic: drop outs; audience: ex yungeleit
> mostly professionals whose children are not yet teens) given by a
> well respected Rebbe from an out of town yeshiva,  he said "The
> worst home is better than the best dorm". While he admitted it was
> an exaggeration, I personally, based on my experiences as someone
> who dormed during high school in one highly respected yeshiva  and
> a dorm counselor in another, will first look for an in-town high
> school for my sons before sending them to a dormitory yeshiva.

I never dormed and my children are too young to have peers who are
dorming.  I would appreciate a discussion of the pros and cons of
dorming vs. parental upbringing during the high school years.  I do
recall that when I was in college at YU, it did not seem that I
missed anything living away from home.  (Perhaps, a social
worker/psychologist might explain:) At what age does parental
supervision become less important?  And what about the independence
fostered through living away from home?

Kol tuv,
Moshe
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

> Hirschian Torah im Derech Eretz: Pro all areas of secular study,
including
a strong positive attitude towards culture, literature and the arts - but
with the caveat that they all be adjunct to and subordinate to Torah and
its standards, and that their study be delineated by yiras shomayim. <
In this vein, I recommend (esp. if you don't have the time or the desire to
read Rav Hirsch's works) Rabbi Yehudah (Leo) Levi's Tradition 31:3 article,
entitled "Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch -- Myth and Fact."  Pages 6-8 address
secular studies of various kinds; based on them, I would emphasize that the
"caveat" means Rav Hirsch was *not* "[p]ro *all* areas."  To paraphrase
Rabbi S. Danziger's understanding of TIDE, Rav Hirsch would not be "pro"
any aspect of this world which cannot be purified into Torah.

Michael Poppers * Elizabeth, NJ

Granted. The dangers of oversimplification :-).

On Tue, 6 Jul 1999, Michael Poppers wrote:

> > Hirschian Torah im Derech Eretz: Pro all areas of secular study,
> including a strong positive attitude towards culture, literature and the
> arts - but with the caveat that they all be adjunct to and subordinate
> to Torah and its standards, and that their study be delineated by yiras
> shomayim. < In this vein, I recommend (esp. if you don't have the time
> or the desire to read Rav Hirsch's works) Rabbi Yehudah (Leo) Levi's
> Tradition 31:3 article, entitled "Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch -- Myth
> and Fact."  Pages 6-8 address secular studies of various kinds; based on
> them, I would emphasize that the "caveat" means Rav Hirsch was *not*
> "[p]ro *all* areas."  To paraphrase Rabbi S. Danziger's understanding of
> TIDE, Rav Hirsch would not be "pro"  any aspect of this world which
> cannot be purified into Torah. 
> 

YGB

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

Pulling from my "sent" file, I found this nice metaphor.

: Rabbi Y.Y. Weinberg, the S'ridei Aish, uses the following model to explain
: Hirsch's TIDE:
:     The Torah, according to Rav Hirsch, is the force that gives form. Form,
:     to Aristotle's thought, means a thing's essential nature in distinction
:     to the substance from which it is embodied. Derekh Eretz is merely the
:     matter on which Torah works. (Essay in "Shimshon Rephael Hirsch: Mishnaso
:     Vishitaso")

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for  6-Jul-99: Shelishi, Matos-Masei
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H O"Ch 335:5-336:2
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 3a
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         Kuzari III 69-72

Arnie Lustiger had asked if someone could summarize the hespedim that were
said at R' Weinberg's lavaya.  While I don't have the time to do that, I
would like to pass on a story that was related at the shiva house by Rabbi
Emmanuel Feldman (R'  Weinberg's mechutan):


When Amram Feldman (the brother of R' Weinberg's son-in-law) died suddenly
at 39, he left 4 children ages 2-10. The Rosh Yeshiva zt'l went to be
menachem avel and told Rabbi Feldman he had to leave for around an hour but
would be back. When he returned, they asked him where he went. He answered
that he had to have a meeting with some people. 

The next morning, the Feldman kids came down and asked "Who was that man
with the white beard and black coat?" They said that this man came upstairs
the night before to their room, laid down in bed with them, and told them
what was happening in Shamayim, what kind of place it was, and what as
happening to Amram there. He asked them if they had any questions for him
about Shamayim and he spoke to them for an hour. They wanted to know who it
was.

Eli Turkel wrote:  <<

There was an article in the weekend Jerusalem Post that claimed that
Baale Teshuva in the US frequently includes professionals like
doctors, lawyers, computer people etc.
On the other hand the baale teshuva in Israel are either originally
from America or else working class usually edot mizrach.  >>

In my neighborhood (which boasts a fair number of baalei tshuva),
you can find the following fairly recent baalei tshuva (wives included):

1.  A professor of aeronautics from the Technion. His wife is a
     psychologist.
2.  A professor of agricultural engineering (Technion), considered
     one of the foremost water experts in Israel.
3.  An engineer who was a very senior manager and division supervisor
     at Rafael  (a top military-industrial concern in Haifa).  He recently
     took an early pension to learn full-time in Kollel.
     His wife has a private practice in special education (reading
     specialist).
4.  An architect.

Though the number of professionals in Israel becoming religious has
dropped off from levels of ten years ago, the Arachim and Lev L'Achim
organizations are still doing quite a nice job in kiruv work here.
Recently Arachim organized a well-attended seminar in Thailand (!) for
upper-middle-class post-army Israeli youth touring  the Far East  (the
reasoning being that far away from the anti-religious Israeli social
stigmas,
they would be more receptive).  The seminar, attended by twice as many
people as originally planned, was judged a tremendous success, one of
its results being the founding of a baalei tshuva yeshiva in Hong Kong.

<<  The writer further claimed that this was caused by the activities
of the religious parties in Israel which alienated the more
intellectual levels in Israel.    Any comments?  >>

Of course, this is my opinion,  but I would place more of the blame on the
aggressively left-wing, anti-religious press and electronic media  which
goes out of its way to ignore 99% of the good things in the religious world
and concentrate on the activities of the lunatic fringes.   The media is in
fact "mobilized"  ("m'guyas" in Hebrew) to present as negative and
unrepresentative a picture of religious life as it possibly can, and
unfortunately they have achieved a fair measure of success.

Kol tuv,
Shlomo Godick
Rechasim, Israel

David Herskovic wrote:   <<

.. Often individuals with talent but with little prospect
for a career in the yeshive world and also without the will to hold down
a job or ability to prosper in commerce vent their frustration at
their inability to channel their talents in the wider world by
convincing themselves that in reality the majority of 'fraye' want to be
frum if only they were shown the way and were ridded of the negative
influence of the secular media.   >>

Reb Dovid, aren't you being overly cynical?  Are you sure you haven't
crossed the boundary of speaking generalized lashon ha-ra on groups
and organizations?   I am acquainted with quite a number of kiruv
professionals and I can vouch that the overwhelming majority are
highly talented people who sacrifice "success" in the secular world for
the sake of helping their Jewish brothers.    A  Jew has the obligation
to give spiritual as well as material succor to his fellow Jew.  If he
hasn't
the talent, he should donate to kiruv organizations; if he has, he should
harness it to help Jews denied a traditional upbringing to appreciate
Yiddishkeit.   Just because you ran into a "lo-mutzlach" rav from Israel
barking slogans and "rachmana litzlans", that  does not entitle you to
generalize to a whole group of kiruv professionals.

One gets the impression that you are speaking in generalities and have
not troubled to acquaint yourself with the Israeli kiruv movement from up
close.   Have you heard any of the Israeli kiruv lecturers on tape casettes?
Have you listened to Rav Noigroshel, Rav Zvi Inbal, Rav Mordechai Ben Porat,
Rav Moshe Weinberger, Rav Shalom Sebernik, Rav Dovid Gottleib?
I think you will be pleasantly surprised by the intellectual rigor
and sophistication displayed on these tapes.

<< Even when people have the best intentions crude methods are often used
to attract baalei tshuve. These include Torah codes, pseudo sciences and
other forms of quackery which are supposed to 'prove' to anybody who
cares to look that we are in the right. I once put it to one of these
mekarvim why if it is all so obvious did the rambam bother with moreh
nvukhim and the khovas halvoves with shar hyikhud. >>

Listen to Rav Noigroshel analyze the various schools of cosmology --
Aristotelian, Platonian, and that of modern physics -- in his 90 minute
lecture on "Creation and the Big Bang".   Far from being a glib
presentation, it is a lengthy, reasoned exposition of the revolution in
cosmological theory that, spurred by the discoveries of Heisenburg,
Einstein, and Penzias, came to fruition in the twentieth century.
I  think that the level of intellectual sophistication is at least at high
as that
of Moreh N'vuchim.   This is a good example of the intellectual fare served
up at kiruv seminars in Israel.

Many intelligent people have taken issue with the Torah codes, but many
equally intelligent people support them.   Professor Eliyahu Ripps of
Hebrew University is considered to be a world-class mathematician.
Rav Zvi Inbal, formerly of the Technion,  is a first-rate intellectual who,
in addition to keeping a very crowded lecture schedule (usually
lecturing gratis with only his travel costs re-imbursed),
runs his own chemical laboratory and holds an important international
patent in applied chemistry.  Dr. Harold Gans is a highly respected
cryptologist from the National Security Agency.  Would you call them
quacks or pseudo-scientists?   Do an internet search on "torah codes"
and I think you will be convinced that we are seeing here a legitimate
academic controversy which has yet to be resolved.

<<  I am not suggesting that all tshuve movements in Israel are one way and
all outside Israel another  >>

You certainly could have fooled me ...

Kol tuv,
Shlomo Godick
Rechasim, Israel

I want to thank both RYGB and RYZ for their reference to the Pithei
Teshuvah (YD 116:10), who quotes the "Solet le-Minhah" as harshly
criticizing anyone who refuses to eat something that is battel
be-shishim. Now, at the risk of confessing my ignorance, I do not know
who the "Solet le-Minhah" is, but if a better-informed listmember can
enlighten me, I would be most grateful.   Also, as RYGB noted, the
Pithei Teshuvah there provides evidence for the contrary position as
well.

But I do not know why we are focusing on the words of an obscure (to me)
Aharon.  RYGB writes:

>I do not know of any
>examples where the Poskim are more machmir - except in cases of chisaron
>yedi'ah - over Chazal. Perhaps you might give an example?

I am certain that I am not the only one on this list to learn hilkhot
shehitah, but anyone who has can attest that they present a host of such
examples.

For those who have not learned them (or for those who have not reviewed
them recently), I present the following.

According to the Gemara in Hullin, there are 5 basic pesulei shehitah:
shehiyah, derasah, haladah, hagramah and ikur.  With respect to every
one (with the possible exception of haladah), we Ashkenazim are mahmir
on Hazal.

Regarding shehiyah (hesitating during shehitah), see Hullin 32a and
Rishonim thereon.  Then look at YD 23 and the Rema at 23:2, 3, 5 and 6.

Regarding derasah (hacking, as opposed to slicing) check out the Mishnah
and Gemara (Hullin 30b-31a) with Rishonim, then see YD 24:1-2 and Rema
there (to s.k. 2, 5 and 6).

Regarding hagramah (sliding to an invalid location), see the mishnah
Hullin 18a and Gemara on the following daf with Rishonim.  Then see YD
24:12 and 14 with Rema.

Regarding ikur, see Hullin 20a and 44a, again with Rishonim, then look
at YD 24:15 and Rema there.

In each case, one finds a lively debate in Hazal and Rishonim regarding
the precise classification of these pesulim.  These differences are
largely reflected in the words of the Mehabber (as well as the Tur
before him).  But the Rema repeatedly writes that we Ashkenazim are
noheg le-hahmir for everything.  So, for example, whereas the Amoraim
offer several possibilities for the shiur of shehiyah, the Rema notes
that we are noheg lifsol even for a mashehu, a possibility that does not
appear in the Gemara or Rishonim.  Note too that some cases of minhag
le-hahmir are rooted in the principle of ein anu beki'in, but that
principle is clearly not relevant in all cases, e.g., in the case of
shehiyah.

It goes without saying that I am not the first person to notice this.
For example, Mahratz Chajes mentions this in his comparison of Sephardic
to Ashkenazic pesak (in Darkei ha-Hora'ah, I think; I'll find the exact
citation upon request).

Given that the Ashkenazic community as a whole has been mahmir on hazal
in these areas for more than 400 years, I remain puzzled by the RYGB's
statement:

>Chazal are the final arbiters of
>Halacha. Those who would be more machmir than they are undermining that
>authority.

She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu,

Eli Clark

R. Daniel Eidensohn asks:

>My question was based on the quotes from Rav Lichtenstein which seem
>to place a strong imperative on *mastering* secular thought and
>*immersion* in them. In my limited research  I have not come across a
>comparable statement by Rav Soleveitchik.

When searching for a quotation of R. Soloveitchik, one should remember
that R. Soloveitchik wrote sparingly and published still less.  As a
result, many of his views on various topics were not set down by him on
paper and many nuances of his thought were never expressed in print.
Thus, as noted by two listmembers, he did discuss the value of secular
education in an oral presentation.

Moreover, the relatively small number of pieces that R. Soloveitchik did
publish focus on topics of his own choosing.  In contrast, R.
Lichtenstein has often written at the request of others, addressing
topics not necessarily of his own choosing.  Thus, for example, his
classic article on the relationship of Halakhah and morality was written
at the request of Prof. Marvin Fox a.h., and the piece I quoted in an
earlier post was commissioned by R. J.J. Schachter for inclusion in the
book he was editing.

She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu,

Eli Clark

Kudos to RYGB for noting six different schools of thought that favor
secular studies.

Two important points require emphasis, however.

First, it is striking that only with respect to RSR Hirsch does RYGB
refer to the:

>caveat that they all be adjunct to and subordinate to Torah and
>its standards, and that their study be delineated by yiras shomayim.

I think this caveat applies (mutatis mutandis) to all of the schools
enumerated.

Second, in terms of understanding each school, it is worthwhile to take
note of the deeper philosophical foundations of each perspective.  Thus,
for example, Rambam's aproach is a direct outgrowth of his commitment to
an Aristotelian worldview according to which, among other things,
science and philosophy are considered coextensive.   Similarly, Hirsch's
perspective cannot be divorced from his broader identification with a
particularly 19th century German romanticism.

This, beside the fact that, as R. Lichtenstein has noted repeatedly
(echoing G. Steiner), the advocacy of culture is far more difficult for
anyone living in the latter half of the 20th century.  I think this
point hardly needs amplification.

She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu,

Eli Clark

 Shalom Carmy wrote:

>.2. Serious people do everything seriously. I once heard R.
Lichtenstein
>express displeasure at talmidim who were playing basketball
>half-heartedly. The argument can be made, and R. Lichtenstein has
made it
>orally, if I understand him correctly, that in order to have a good
>general education, you need to know some area in detail. If you
>don't master that sub-field, you'll never understand what real study
is
>about. In fact, when people dabble (whether in Torah or in liberal
arts)
>they are usually fuzzy and unable to think clearly about anything.
When
>you have learned to work seriously, you can get a clear idea of your
>competence and limitations in other areas too.

>3. Whenever the Rav zt"l always advised me about advising younger
people
>the ultimate question was what that person wanted to accomplish. If
you
>want to be intelligent about certain matters, you will do what needs
to be
>done. He wanted to make a contribution to philosophy of science. He
>was well-informed on many other subjects because he thought these
were
>matters one needs to know.

>In a word, I am not sure what is meant by mastery or immersion in the

>abstract.

The picture is starting to get clearer - I appreciate your patience.
But I really don't comprehend Rav Soleveitchik's message to me. If I
were a genius like Rav Soleveitchik or Rav Hutner - I can understand
that it is desirable and conceivable  to attempt to master the full
range of human knowledge - and bring the two peaks together. But for a
person on my level - and I assume the majority of the rest of the
human race there is clearly a need to prioritize ones time and energy
- to recognize severe limitations in mastering anything. My quandary
was identified in a fascinating article you wrote [Tradition Fall 1981
page 218-226]
*Rav Yitzhak Hutner's lecture to a teacher's conference*.
 "Let us note one major theme which appears in many of his studies on
Hilkhot Talmud Torah:The commandment to study is unique in that it is
fulfilled not only during the time when it is actually performed, but
even when one must interrupt study in order to fulfill another
mitsvah, one should perform that mitsvah and "resume one's study". R.
Hutner asks:what is the need for the last phrase - if the cause for
the interruption has ceased, there is no longer reason to withdraw
from one's study? And R. Hutner remarks that when one resumes study
straightaway, it is not as if one had commenced studying anew, but as
if the interruption had not occurred; the intervening period is
subsumed within the continuous commitment to study. In one context R.
Hutner (whose sensitivity to music was well known) borrows an analogy
from the realm of music: when one speaks, for example of a two hour
violin concert, one refers, not only to the moments when bow presses
catgut, but to the entire time-continuum devote to music....
This grasp of the nature of talmud Torah may help us to formulate an
approach to two issues of significance for the modern Orthodox teacher
at whatever level. I NOTE THESE AREAS WITHOUT MAKING ANY CLAIM
WHATSOEVER THAT R. HUTNER HIMSELF INTENDED, WOULD IDENTIFY WITH, OR
SYMPATHIZE WITH SUCH APPLICATION: [emphasis added]
1. Every Bet Midrash has seen students defeated by their own
unrealistic concept of hatmadah....the Kotzker Rebbi cracked, He
learns so much he never has time to know anything"......
2. The time devoted to the liberal arts, particularly when their
relevance to Torah is not immediately and explicitly demonstrable, is
a source of anxiety to those who maintain an interest in these
disciplines, and who, like myself, believe that this involvement is
advantageous to the religious growth of CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS [emphasis
added]....Yet here too there might be room to suggest that the sense
of the experiential continuum of commitment to study as formulated by
R. Hutner may contribute towards maintaining a healthy perspective."

1). Why the hesitation about equating your analysis with Rav Hutner's
perspective?
2). Why the apparent diffidence in expressing your thesis - which
seems consonant with Rav Soleveitchik's position? Did you ever discuss
this with Rav Soleveitchik?
3). Was there a  difference between Rav Hutner and Rav Soleveitchik
concerning their personal relationships to non Torah knowledge  - or
did they only differ on their programs for the masses?


                        Daniel Eidensohn

Shoshanah M. & Yosef G. Bechhofer wrote:

> 
> Again, who are you trying to convince? There is no one here at
> Avodah/Aishdas who disagrees with the premise that one must think things
> out, so what good does it do anyone here to hear of horror stories from
> the great outside world? You do not mean to accuse all right wing Jews of
> not thinking, just as no one would accuse all left wing Jews of slack
> observance. So you are critiquing people who are not here. What Ahavas or
> Yiras Hashem exactly is being enhanced?
> I am still waiting for this topic to be one that can generate genuine
> internal discussion among us Avodah/Aishdas members. So far I cannot see
> it.

It is my view that although one of the primary purposes of this list is 
honest debate amongst ourselves on various topics relating to Halacha 
and/or Hashkafa  so that we may stimulate thought about our own views in 
the light of opposing views... it should not be the only valid use of 
this list.  I think it is approriate to discuss what any and each of us 
see as flaws in the observance of Yahadus by large groups of Orthodox 
Jews outside this list.  It is true that Many points brought up by 
posters, including me, have had no detracters on this list.  I suppose 
you might say  that it seems I am "preaching to the Choir".  But that 
isn't the point of my posts in this instance. My point is to clarify 
what I perceive to be a problem amongst our bretheren. Knowing how to 
define the problem is half the solution.  I don't know if any or even 
all of us on this list can do anything to change what is going on in 
certain Orthodox circles. But neither does it serve any puropose to be 
ignorant of the problem, a problem that I believe has a negative effect 
on Klal Israel. At least if we know there is a problem than we can try 
and do something about it when an occasion arises. 

For example. in the above mentioned topic... (thinking for oneself)... 
If there is anyone on the list who happens to have any kind of kesher 
with a...lets say.... R. Elia Svei, then maybe, just maybe, in an off 
handed and respectful manner he can bring up the concern to him and see 
what his response would be. Perhaps our perceptions about this problem 
are incorrect.  Perhaps something is alredy being done.  Perhaps R. Svei 
would disagree with our position entirely. I don't know.  But One thing 
is certain.  We need to know what is going on in the world  (of 
Orthdoxy).

I feel that I was rambling on a bit.  I hope you got the jist of what I 
was trying to say.

HM

Just an interesting mareh makom: the M"B in Biyur Halacha in siman 47 
discusses the shittas haGR"A that birchas haTorah is said even on thinking 
(hirhur) divrei Torah.  I found a one line mention of this is MaHaRaL end ch. 
4 of Nesivav haTorah in Nesivos Olam where he writes based on the gemara 
Eiruvin that T"T must be done verbally that if done only by hirhur no bracha 
is recited.

-Chaim

On Tue, 6 Jul 1999, Clark, Eli wrote:

> According to the Gemara in Hullin, there are 5 basic pesulei shehitah: 
> shehiyah, derasah, haladah, hagramah and ikur.  With respect to every
> one (with the possible exception of haladah), we Ashkenazim are mahmir
> on Hazal. 
> 
> Regarding shehiyah (hesitating during shehitah), see Hullin 32a and
> Rishonim thereon.  Then look at YD 23 and the Rema at 23:2, 3, 5 and 6. 
> 
> Regarding derasah (hacking, as opposed to slicing) check out the Mishnah
> and Gemara (Hullin 30b-31a) with Rishonim, then see YD 24:1-2 and Rema
> there (to s.k. 2, 5 and 6). 
> 
> Regarding hagramah (sliding to an invalid location), see the mishnah
> Hullin 18a and Gemara on the following daf with Rishonim.  Then see YD
> 24:12 and 14 with Rema. 
> 
> Regarding ikur, see Hullin 20a and 44a, again with Rishonim, then look
> at YD 24:15 and Rema there. 
> 
> In each case, one finds a lively debate in Hazal and Rishonim regarding
> the precise classification of these pesulim.  These differences are
> largely reflected in the words of the Mehabber (as well as the Tur
> before him).  But the Rema repeatedly writes that we Ashkenazim are
> noheg le-hahmir for everything.  So, for example, whereas the Amoraim
> offer several possibilities for the shiur of shehiyah, the Rema notes
> that we are noheg lifsol even for a mashehu, a possibility that does not
> appear in the Gemara or Rishonim.  Note too that some cases of minhag
> le-hahmir are rooted in the principle of ein anu beki'in, but that
> principle is clearly not relevant in all cases, e.g., in the case of
> shehiyah. 
>

As you might expect, I beg to differ. Even the case of shehi'ah is based
in the larger sense of "ein anu beki'in" - i.e., we are not electing to
reject Chazal because of new information and therefore be machmir over
their standard, rather, since we are not sure as to the resolution of the
shehi'ah issue, we say "ma lanu v'la'tzara ha'zos", better to avoid the
whole issue. This is a practical chumra, not one based on conceptual
rejection of Chazal's benchmark.

But this is all in defense of R' Aharon Soloveichik. You might do better
by asking him or a family member dirrectly.

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 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         ]