Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 055

Saturday, October 23 1999

• Yellow Journalism
• Re: Salaries / Schar Batoloh
• Re: Ken yehi ratzon
• Writing a letter to the editor of Yated
• yoatzot in Haaretz
• Re: Yated Bilti Neeman
• Re: boggle
• Yated Bilti Neeman
• Re: Yated Neeman (hereafter, YN) article
• biased journalism
• Salaries / Schar Batoloh
• Re: Yated Bilti Neeman & media distortion
• Re: Salaries / Schar Batoloh
• Re: Yated Neeman (hereafter, YN) article
• Fw: The NY Times
• Dor Hapalagah
• Yoatzot
• CHASAM SOFER zt'l
• RE: Yoatzos Neeman or Female Rabbis

My definition of yellow journalism: a paper whose slant is different than
mine.

I would have been happier had the Yated article limited itself to factual
objections and avoided sarcasm. The course they did choose made me wonder
if they felt they needed to take an emotional approach because they couldn't
make their case on facts alone.

That said, I really don't think name calling belongs on Avodah. We're trying
to discuss something already identified by more than one chaveir as a
potentially divisive issue. We're only going to get anywhere if you keep that
in mind while posting.

Besides, if you use ad hominems instead of factual complaints, I'm sure I
wouldn't be alone in questioning how strong you percieve your own argument.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 22-Oct-99: Shishi, Lech-Lecha
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 57a
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         Haftorah

--- Allen Baruch <Abaruch@SINAI-BALT.COM> wrote:
> Just off the top of my head - 
> Perhaps yashrus says that the schar batoloh for those who teach
> our children should be "cheshboned"  according to what it would
> cost *us* to stay home and do the job?
> 

I don't think that it's an issue of yashrus.  A melamed is *not
allowed* to receive pay for teaching (based on Nedarim 37a: "Re'eh
lemad'ti etchem chukim u'mishpatim"--ma ani [i.e., Moshe Rabeinu]
bechinam af atem b'chinam).  He may only receive pay for his schar
batala.  Anything above that amount would constitute pay for
teaching.

BTW, yesterday RYZ suggested that perhaps women are exempt from this
din (presumably because they are not chayav in talmud torah or in
teaching torah).  However, the Ran in Nedarim 37a implies that this
din is a drasha based on the pasuk (above)--which does not
differentiate between men and women--and gives no hint as to any
reasoning based on the kiyum hamitzvah of teaching torah.

Kol tuv,
Moshe

=====

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com

Rich Wolpoe wonders:


> 
> Note that Chabad's Nusach Ari they DO answer Omain, and isn't that the case for 
> Eidot haMizrach, too?
> 


No.


---sam

If you interested in writing a letter to the editor of Yated, you can
write him at nyp88@aol.com

Kol tuv,
Moshe


=====

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com

please see the Anglo supplement of the weekend Haaretz for more on this
subject







a

Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer wrote:


> Like many, I had thought that censorship and bias were a tool of the
> RW, abhorred by the LW. Now, I knew that this was untrue.





It's on both sides, in both the religious and secular worlds. It's an
unfortunate fact of human nature (which we as yirei Shamaim should be
working to overcome) that 'objectivity' is centered right about where
subjectivity should be. Unless there is a very deliberate effort made
to avoid biased writing, any article will obviously present the views
of it's author, despite the protestations of objectivity. It actually
bothers me to the point that I can't read newspapers anymore, whoever
the publisher might be, Left, Right, religious, secular, whatever. It
seems that everyone has an agenda they need to push, and push they do.


---sam

Yitzchak Zirkind wrote:
>
>Aren't the Halachas that Ein Morin Kein transmitted in Shaas?
>

Some of them are.  Do we know that all of them are?

David Riceman

Agreed.  I have found out from personal experience.  Valid quotes are repeated 
out-of-context to distort completely their original intent...

Rich Wolpoe


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________

Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer wrote:


> Like many, I had thought that censorship and bias were a tool of the 
> RW, abhorred by the LW. Now, I knew that this was untrue.





It's on both sides, in both the religious and secular worlds. It's an 
unfortunate fact of human nature (which we as yirei Shamaim should be 
working to overcome) that 'objectivity' is centered right about where 
subjectivity should be. Unless there is a very deliberate effort made 
to avoid biased writing, any article will obviously present the views 
of it's author, despite the protestations of objectivity. It actually 
bothers me to the point that I can't read newspapers anymore, whoever 
the publisher might be, Left, Right, religious, secular, whatever. It 
seems that everyone has an agenda they need to push, and push they do.


---sam

In Avodah 4#54, YGBechhofer replied:
> My query, as one who reads the NYT religiously, and knows the high
standards
of journalistic objectivity set by that flagship newspaper, is, do you
really know of a Jewish media mouthpiece that is not biased to a certain
viewpoint? <
Subjectivity (a.k.a. humanity) of viewpoint is one issue -- over the years,
I've read countless examples of it in media outlets ranging from The New
York Times to Arutz-7, from The Jewish Observer to The Jewish Week, etc. --
and editorializing, especially when done with condescension, is quite
another.  If we're all dedicated to searching emes out (in all avenues,
and, with regards to this matter, particularly in our publications), it is
incumbent upon us to pursue and integrate emes in our speech/writings
rather than sink to the level noted to exist in general and which was
specifically evident in that YN article.  As the [misquoted ;-] saying
goes, two wrongs don't make a right; worse, this type of wrong, which is
public in nature, has fundamental chillul-HaShaim implications.

On a personal note: a good friend of mine, with whom I formerly learned in
Aish HaTorah's One-on-One program, remains a "religious" Conservative (e.g.
he does not believe in the Divine nature of the Torah).  He looks forward
to receiving from me & reading the Jewish Observer issues -- if I
understand his feelings correctly, he considers the writing/editing to be
on a high level -- even though he disagrees with many opinions expressed
therein, and they've often served as a valuable springboard for
discussions.  "Bias"ed or not, I consider JO a paradigm that certain other
Torah-true-Jew-edited publications unfortunately have seen fit not to
follow.

All the best (including wishes for a great Shabbos!) from
Michael Poppers * Elizabeth, NJ

another example of destructive journalism.


Friday, October 22, 1999

>
>
> Haredim mock Rabin memorial
>
>
>
>   By Shahar Ilan, Ha'aretz Correspondent
> As Israelis marked the Hebrew date of the fourth anniversary of the
> assassination of prime minister Yitzhak Rabin yesterday, the ultra-Orthodox
> press found something to joke about. The attack was led by the Haredi weekly
> Hamishpacha (Family), which mocked the secular leaders of the remembrance
> day, as well as the heads of the Reform movement and Meimad.
>
> One article in Hamishpacha portrayed the national day of mourning in 100
> years' time: "The teacher appears on the stage, wrapped in black satin
> ribbons ... and in a thin and choked voice says, 'Today is the saddest day in
> the history of the Jewish people since we returned to our land. A day when
> the heavens cry tears along with us, the birds stop singing, flowers close up
> their petals...'"
>
> In an article headed "It's starting to get tiresome, friend" (a take-off on
> the "Shalom, Haver" car stickers that have appeared over the years), Kobi
> Sela says, "I do not take part in the annual festival, now in its fourth
> year." The day is referred to throughout the Haredi press as a "festival."
>
> In a local Jerusalem Haredi paper, Hashavua b'Yerushalayim (This Week in
> Jerusalem), Yaakov Rivlin writes, "Prime Minister Ehud Barak's good fortune
> meant that his 100th day in office fell on the annual Rabin festival."
>
> Rivlin and Sela also had a few suggestions for their readers on how to
> survive the day. Sela warned his readers not to leave their houses until the
> passing of the secular sadness. "The shelters can be evacuated on Shabbat
> night ... Important! Do not read interviews with the widow, it will only
> damage your health." Rivlin advised them not to listen to their radios so as
> not to be bored by the special, long-winded Knesset debate.
>
> What annoyed the Haredi press the most were those religious people who
> actually mourned Rabin's passing. The Jerusalem paper attacked the 54 rabbis
> who signed the petition calling for Rabin's murderer Yigal Amir to be
> excommunicated. According to the writer, the rabbis are trying "to find favor
> and seem enlightened, and to perhaps gain a compliment, a pat on the back or
> a smile from the left and from the media."
>
> The editor of the Yated Neeman newspaper, Natan Ze'ev Grossman, made fun of
> those Reform rabbis who declared a fast day and recited the Yizkor
> (Remembrance) prayer. "They want to get rid of the fast days commemorating
> the destruction of the Temples so that they can make room for ceremonies for
> Yitzhak Rabin.
>
> ) copyright 1999 Ha'aretz. All Rights Reserved

>>I don't think that it's an issue of yashrus.  A melamed is *not allowed* to 
receive pay for teaching (based on Nedarim 37a: "Re'eh lemad'ti etchem chukim 
u'mishpatim"--ma ani [i.e., Moshe Rabeinu] bechinam af atem b'chinam).  He may 
only receive pay for his schar batala.  Anything above that amount would 
constitute pay for teaching.

<snup>

Kol tuv,
Moshe<<

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________

While this might be accurate, it seems to be narrowly focused and overlooking 
aspects of the entire picture...

Question:
How does one compensate Baalei Krio for their "work" on Shabbos?  Or Jewish 
waiters who serve meals on Shabbos?

The answer is: there is a ha'aromo involved that permits one - under certain 
conditions - to get around the plain vanilla din.

Simlarly, mechancim are in a clasroom where transmitting Torah is not 
their one and only duty.  They grade papers, take attendance, insure the 
safety of the building and of the children. They are defacto child carers, 
etc. It seems that the the dino degmoro has been practcially restricted 
and therefore narrowly applied to the transmission of Torah itself.  
Therefore, paying a melmade by the possuk might still be ossur.  But, if a 
parent is not present in the classroom to watching over their child, to 
ensure his child is behaving properly, to guarantee their sfatey -  
thereby leaving the Mechenach Free to give Torah for Free <pun> - then a 
case can be made that pedagogues do a LOT more than simply teach Torah.  
And for that professional style training they rate a prfoessional style 
compensation.


I recall the story where a person asked a gadol (I forget who) and said since I 
need not spend my own money for kibbud ov vo'eim therefore I do not need to 
travel to see my parents in a distant place.

The Gadol responded, No, you MUST go see your parents.  If you want to save 
yourself from walking there, the cost of tranasportation is for YOUR benefit.

Notice how the Gadol defined the case in such a way as to show the heter of not 
spending one's own money to be moot...

Rich Wolpoe

--- "Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer"
<sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu> wrote:
> There is anunderlying assumption that many have here that the
> RW media
> distort, while the LW media is accurate. Several people wrote me
> offlist
> rather virulent things about certain RW publications (that they
> named by
> name).
> 
> My query, as one who reads the NYT religiously, and knows the high
> standards
> of journalistic objectivity set by that flagship newspaper, is, do
> you
> really know of a Jewish media mouthpiece that is not biased to a
> certain
> viewpoint? I have yet to come across such a paper or magazine. I
> have yet to
> see in, a LW publication an essay saying "Maybe we are wrong about
> so-and-so", as much as I have yet to see such in a RW publication.
> <snip>

First, I would distinguish censorship & bias from actual distortion.  It is
reasonable to expect that a magazine which is devoted to a certain cause
will publish pieces which further that cause.  To expect a "maybe we are
wrong piece" is going a bit far.  However, that does not excuse a piece
which distorts the truth.

Also, I differentiate between a newspaper/newsmagazine, of which I expect
unbiased reporting, and a magazine.  Yated purports to report the news (the
yoatzot article was in their news section, not their opinion section; the
article read like a news article, not an opinion piece); consequently, a
reader who had no other information about yoatzot would believe that the
writer's article was the truth, not his opinion.  I don't mind when a
newspaper publishes an op-ed piece which is one-sided (provided it doesn't
distort), or when an opinion-type magazine does so.  The distinction I draw
is typical of Americans, while Israelis (and I understand, Europeans)
believe that even newspapers may reveal their biases in reporting on the
news.  However, even Israeli newspapers like Haaretz make some effort at
objectivity (in their news pieces).

> B'didi hava uvda. I may have noted this before, please forgive the
> redundancy. If you go to the aishdas website, you will find, in the
> baistefila section, several essays that I have written. Most have
> been
> published. Some have not. Of those that have not, one was
> commissioned by a
> prominent LW media mouthpiece. It is a review of R' Herschel
> Schachter's
> "Nefesh Ha'Rav" and some related works. In it, I cite RHS's
> paragraphs
> relating that RYBS held that women must, al pi din, cover their
> hair and
> that he would have preferred that Maimonides be separate. I cited
> these
> among examples of points in the book that were likely to stir
> controversy.
> 
<snip>
> They demanded that I delete those passages. I refused, and they (who had
> commissioned this piece) rejected it. I have not been asked to
> write for
> this publication since.
> 
> That experience (and some subsequent ones) was revelatory and
> educational
> for me. Like many, I had thought that censorship and bias were a
> tool of the
> RW, abhorred by the LW. Now, I knew that this was untrue.

I just read the article you wrote about and certainly won't defend the LW
publication.  However, I don't expect the Jewish Observer to contain an
article summarizing Rav Kook's tshuvot, either.  An ideologically oriented
magazine has the right to cherry-pick what it writes about (unless that
cherry-picking leads to distortion of the subject at hand).  A reader who
desires a balanced picture is always free to read articles written from the
other side of the spectrum.  This does not excuse distortions of the
subject, which was the case in the yoatzot article.

I also believe that a newspaper, as compared to an ideological magazine, has
a greater duty to report all sides of an issue.

Kol tuv,
Moshe

While I agrre with all that RRW wrote, I respons here only to one snippet.
The Gadol was R' Chaim Soloveitchik.

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

----- Original Message -----
From: <richard_wolpoe@ibi.com>
To: <avodah@aishdas.org>; <avodah@aishdas.org>
Sent: Friday, October 22, 1999 11:44 AM
Subject: Salaries / Schar Batoloh


> I recall the story where a person asked a gadol (I forget who) and said
since I
> need not spend my own money for kibbud ov vo'eim therefore I do not need
to
> travel to see my parents in a distant place.
>
> The Gadol responded, No, you MUST go see your parents.  If you want to
save
> yourself from walking there, the cost of tranasportation is for YOUR
benefit.
>
> Notice how the Gadol defined the case in such a way as to show the heter
of not
> spending one's own money to be moot...
>
> Rich Wolpoe

One of the reasons I have made it one of my main venue for publishing my
material.

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

----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Poppers <MPoppers@kayescholer.com>
To: <avodah@AishDas.org>
Cc: <YGB@AishDas.org>
Sent: Friday, October 22, 1999 11:28 AM
Subject: Re: Yated Neeman (hereafter, YN) article


> On a personal note: a good friend of mine, with whom I formerly learned in
> Aish HaTorah's One-on-One program, remains a "religious" Conservative
(e.g.
> he does not believe in the Divine nature of the Torah).  He looks forward
> to receiving from me & reading the Jewish Observer issues -- if I
> understand his feelings correctly, he considers the writing/editing to be
> on a high level -- even though he disagrees with many opinions expressed
> therein, and they've often served as a valuable springboard for
> discussions.  "Bias"ed or not, I consider JO a paradigm that certain other
> Torah-true-Jew-edited publications unfortunately have seen fit not to
> follow.
>
> All the best (including wishes for a great Shabbos!) from
> Michael Poppers * Elizabeth, NJ
>
>
>

From an anonymous correspondent who reads Avodah...

(For those who distinguish between reporting in a newspaper and writing in a
magazine, please note.)

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

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, October 22, 1999 9:38 AM
Subject: The NY Times


> The New York Times once covered the story of a foster kid my wife and I
were
> caring for. Instead of actually researching all of the story, or settling
> for reporting Ohel's "we can't say because of confidentiality", they
repeated
> the NY Post's version of where the child was placed.
>
> So, they changed this childless and supposedly infertile couple in Queens
whose
> poseik was R' Flaum (of Stern College and now of the White Shul) into a
> Chassidishe family in Boro Park with 7 children of their own.

I noticed something interesting about the story. The Torah (10:31) in ending
the geneology before the story writes, "These are the children of Sheim,
to their families, *lilshonosan*, in their lands to their nations..."

Notice the word is lashon. This geneology takes us through Peleg, so presumable
the mention of languages, countries and nations is a prelude to the Bavel
story which explains the separation in detail.

However, as soon as we pass that pei in your chumash into perek 11, we no
longer find the word lashon. Now the discussion is about safah. "All the
world was one safah and unified divarim" (1). See also pisukim 7, and 9.
What Hashem changed was safos.

I have little idea what the difference is between lashon and safah. I assume
there's a connection between having one safah and having divarim achadim --
there's a unity not just in how things are said, but also in what are said.
I also assume there's a reason why lishonos have to do with national and
ethnic identity. One seems to be about ideological unity, the other about
sociological unity.

Also, if you notice in 11:7-8, it appears that Hashem scatters the people
thereby changing their safah. It wasn't the change that caused the scattering,
but the scattering was the means by which Hashem caused the change.

"(7) Let us go down and mix up sifasam -- which they do not listen one man
the safah of his friend. (8) And Hashem scattered them from there onto the
face of all the land and they stopped building the city."

So it would seem that the transition was: scattering caused nations which
caused lishonos. And having different lishonos and nationalities caused a
divergance in lishonos and divarim.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 22-Oct-99: Shishi, Lech-Lecha
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 57a
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         Haftorah

Since this  *not*  seem to be ending,  let me ask one simple question:

From: harry maryles <hmaryles@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Yoatzos Neeman or Female Rabbis
> 
> I stand by my original post on Yoatzot.
> 
> Here are the main points.
> 
> 1. There seems to be a need for this type of program
> (a sort of Eis Laasos).
	Where,  how and by whom was this need articulated prior to
implementation of Rabbanit Henkin's program?  Is there significant
evidence that the problem was recognized prior to her solution,  or was
it the reverse,  as some on the list have maintained,  i.e. that THM was
a good place to focus the energies of women lookng for the opportunity
for advanced study. 

	I am not taking a position on whether that focus is right or wrong,  but
it appears IMHO to have been a solution to a problem which had not (yet?)
been identified.

Gershon

From Shlomo B Abeles <sba@blaze.net.au>

David Glasner <DGLASNER@FTC.GOV>wrote:
Subject:  Chasam Sofer

..>>>>.. I am not so sure that the Chasam
Sofer was issuing a dogmatic
pronouncement when he said "chadash
assur min haTorah." ... His bon mot
certainly had ideological resonance, but
I question whether when he made that
remark he meant to be taken literally...
Can any of scholarly types out there
provide any textual or
historical information about the Ch. S's
intent in this little pun?<<<<

'Bon mot',  'little pun'!? A bit flippant,
I think, when discussing the words of the
Rabbon shel kol Bnei Hagolah
- the Chasam Sofer ztl.

I have in front of me the sefer "Rabenu
HaChasam Sofer - Mipi K'sovoi"  in
which a whole chapter is dedicated
to the topic of "Chodosh Ossur min
Hatorah"  It seems to have been
quoted by the CS almost a dozen
times - mainly in his Tshuvos.
No doubt that he was
serious and meant it quite literally.

sba

> 7. I still believe the The Gedolei HaTorah would not
> oppose such a program in principle.

According to the author of the Yated article (a neighbor and personal
friend), there are at least *two* such programs underway, under the guidance
of Gedolei HaTorah here in Jerusalem.

Akiva


===========================
Akiva Atwood
POB 27515
Jerusalem, Israel 91274

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


[ 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         ]