Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 078

Friday, October 29 1999

• Re[2]: Bnei Torah and Tolerance
• kidra chaysa (should be kederah)
• Avraham and Succah
• kidra chaysa
• Re: kidra chaysa
• Re: Re[2]: Bnei Torah and Tolerance
• Brich Shmei
• Re: Fw: Fw: Anonymity of RW
• Re: Anonymous Posting
• Re: Ortho activist
• Good vs Evil, Ey on America
• Re: Avraham and Succah
• Anonymous posting
• Re: Brich Shmei
• [none]
• [none]
• monoliths and tefilin
• Friday night cholent
• kidra chaysa
• [none]
• Aliya
• Anonymity and list demographics
• RE: Bnei Torah and Tolerance
• Re: Brich Shmmeh... Should we say it?

Akiva Atwood:>>

True -- but what were the dayanim basing their psak on? There *must* be a point 
post-matan Torah when Judaism was Monolithic, at least while Moshe Rabbeinu was 
alive and giving teaching (unless you want to say that he taught each shevet 
different shitas)<<

Who says?  Isn't it possible that Moshe Rabbeinu taught a Torah that was 
intrinsically multi-faceted?  That his teachings  implied multiple valid 
understanding?

Lemoshol: BH and BS argue re: uv'shovecho - is it positional, i.e. HOW to read 
it, or is it chronological - WHEN to read it.  eilu v'eilu - aren't BOTH 
peirushim implicit?  Couldn't even talmidim of Moshe Rabbienu have a divergence 
of interpretation?

I can certainly recall arguing with classmates over the implicaitons of various 
shiurim just moments after the rebbe finished speaking.

Rich Wolpoe

R. Moshe Feldman writes:

>Somehow, I vaguely recall hearing from Rav Hershel Schachter (in the
>name of the Rav?) that k'daira chaita is not permissible nowadays
>because our stoves are powerful enough that anything could be cooked
>in a relatively short period of time (i.e., by the night's meal) if
>we really tried.

Even so, one could argue that this sevara should not apply to a crock
pot on the low setting (assuming of course that one uses a crock pot on
Shabbat, notwithstanding the hatmanah problem and the shitah of R. SZ
Auerbach.).

Kol tuv,

Eli Clark

I had already known that the Medrash Tanchumah considers mei sotah and
parah adumah to be rewards for Avraham comparing himself to "afar va'eifer",
and similarly when Avraham denies himself even a shoelace or leather strap
he earned us tzitzis and tephillin.

I came across yet another this week, which is new to me. The M"T considers
succah a reward for Avraham providing the mal'achim shade.

This implies something about the mitzvah of succah. Not only should it be a
reminder to have bitachon that HKBH will provide, but it's also a reminder
that we should be providing for others. (Which fits in well with the Ramban's
assertion that the major theme of seifer B'reishis is "mah Ani af ata"
(imitatio dei).

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 28-Oct-99: Chamishi, Vayera
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 60a
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         

I have received clarification from Rav Henkin (Shlita, not z"l <g>) on
his grandfather's rationale.  I await his permission and clarification
before posting it to the list.

Gershon

On Thu, 28 Oct 1999, Moshe Feldman wrote:

> Somehow, I vaguely recall hearing from Rav Hershel Schachter (in the
> name of the Rav?) that k'daira chaita is not permissible nowadays
> because our stoves are powerful enough that anything could be cooked
> in a relatively short period of time (i.e., by the night's meal) if
> we really tried.
> 

I was getting kind of surprised that this was not mentioned, consiidering
the amount of RIETS alumni we have here. This is a b'feirushe Nefesh
HaRav, to teh best of my recollection (i.e., I am too lazy to actuallly go
pull it off the shelf).

YGB

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

I am surprised thatno one has yet ciited the famous Ritva Eruvin 13b, that
the Torah was given to Moshe Rabbeinu with 49 panim tameh and 49 panim
tahor!

On Thu, 28 Oct 1999 richard_wolpoe@ibi.com wrote:

> Akiva Atwood:>>
> 
> True -- but what were the dayanim basing their psak on? There *must* be a point 
> post-matan Torah when Judaism was Monolithic, at least while Moshe Rabbeinu was 
> alive and giving teaching (unless you want to say that he taught each shevet 
> different shitas)<<
> 
> Who says?  Isn't it possible that Moshe Rabbeinu taught a Torah that was 
> intrinsically multi-faceted?  That his teachings  implied multiple valid 
> understanding?
> 
> Lemoshol: BH and BS argue re: uv'shovecho - is it positional, i.e. HOW to read 
> it, or is it chronological - WHEN to read it.  eilu v'eilu - aren't BOTH 
> peirushim implicit?  Couldn't even talmidim of Moshe Rabbienu have a divergence 
> of interpretation?
> 
> I can certainly recall arguing with classmates over the implicaitons of various 
> shiurim just moments after the rebbe finished speaking.
> 
> Rich Wolpoe
> 
> 
> 

YGB

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

As a tefilla, Brich Shmei is a very old tefilla-- even Chabad which, with 
the exception of kabbalos shabbos and Vidui tends not to add to tefilla 
(don't say Akdamus, Yotzros except for Yomim Noraim) say Brich Shmei 
whenever the Torah is read.

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

The Anonymous poster wrote:

> > Regarding the varying levels of negiah laws to
> which RHM refers: I
> > always thought that there was no limud zechus in
> this area. If you
> > can name a reputable Posek who permits married
> women to
> > socially kiss and hug non-family members I would
> be pleased to
> > hear of it.

This is anecdotal information that I have been
informed of by many within the Yekkisha community and
seems to be accepted practice as long as it is not
bederch chiba.  Unfortunately I cannot name you such a
posek myself but perhaps some one in that community
can.

I do believe that this poster should make his identity
known so that he can join the fray more legitimately.
Until then perhaps RYGB can forward this response to
him.

HM


=====

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

--- Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org> wrote:

> but with the difference in population
> there's going to be a difference
> in how many people pile on to tackle the guy. (I
> believe the yoatzot debate
> easily had an order of magnitude more lines from the
> pro crowd than from
> the con and let's-think-first groups.) It can be
> intimidating.
> 
> It's something we really need to keep in check. We
> lost much of our Chassidishe
> population that way.


I'm really sorry to hear that.  I would love to have
them back as well as people from all perspectives.  It
takes two opposing viewpoints to carry on a debate and
I personally believe that debate is the surest track
to Emes.  There is no Toeles in preaching to the
choir.

HM

=====

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

There is much for me to say on this subject but I just
don't have enough time in the day to respond the way I
would like to on many of these posts. (Aren't you all
lucky?)

I just wanted to point out that R. Aaron Soloveichik
was one of the earliest and most vocal anti Vietnam
war protesters, and, in a very emotional way, always
refering to the war as immoral. He spoke out early and
he spoke out often much to the chagrin of the Orthodox
and Traditional establishment at the begining of the
war.  Rav Aaron was a nemisis to those who felt that
we must support what are nation is doing. After all,
who knows better (they used to ask): we mere
citizens,peons who are not privy to vital national
security secrets, or the President et al, who have all
of U.S. intelligence at hand. But R. Aaron persisted
and angered a lot of people in the proccess, which in
the end helped contribute to his demise as RH of HTC.

HM

=====

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

--- richard_wolpoe@ibi.com wrote

(In response to my question of why are there such
extremes in EY)

> Perhaps the nature of the struggle between "Ra" and
> "Tov" creates the need for a
> balancing influence from the other side of the
> struggle...

I think you are right. It's sort of a Torah
homeostasis or Torah ecological balance.  All one has
to do is look to one of the greatest Yeshivos of the
last two hundred years, the Yeshiva of Voloshin.  It
produced More Gedolim then any other but also,
produced more maskilim.  Perhaps it's in the nature of
Good and Evil to work off of eachother, a sort of
reactionary force, a tug of war where the opposing
forces are pulling very hard in opposite directions to
win. Perhaps Chilonim are (over)reacting to Charedim
who are (over)reacting to Chilonim, who are... ad
infinitum.

HM


=====

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

In a message dated 10/28/99 5:38:55 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
micha@aishdas.org writes:

<< 
 For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         
 
  >>
Dear Micha,
I don't know why I just noticed this, but where do you get "its" from in ki 
ner mitzvah vtora or?

Kol Tuv,
Joel

First, on  Avodah there is no such thing a real anonymous post.  One 
person has to be the conduit and the identity of the conduit is known.  
He/She must make a decision whether or not to pass on.  Since this is not 
a moderated list we are relying on the good judgment calls of our 
chaverim, why not let it be okay for whether to accept an anonymous posting.

There are legitimate reasons where someone may wish to be anonymous, but 
the person who transmits it is the one responsible for making a judgement 
call.


Harry J. Weiss
hjweiss@netcom.com

--------------E859CEDC17B8D12639B26985
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Alan Davidson wrote:

> As a tefilla, Brich Shmei is a very old tefilla-- even Chabad which, with
> the exception of kabbalos shabbos and Vidui tends not to add to tefilla
> (don't say Akdamus, Yotzros except for Yomim Noraim) say Brich Shmei
> whenever the Torah is read.
>
> It is my recollection that in Germany we said Brich Shemei (except for
> Yiskor) only on the Shabbos before Sh'vuos and on the Shabbos before Tisha
> B'Av.

Shabbat Shalom
steve


--------------E859CEDC17B8D12639B26985
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
Alan Davidson wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>As a tefilla, Brich Shmei is a very old tefilla--
even Chabad which, with
<br>the exception of kabbalos shabbos and Vidui tends not to add to tefilla
<br>(don't say Akdamus, Yotzros except for Yomim Noraim) say Brich Shmei
<br>whenever the Torah is read.
<p><u><a href="http://www.hotmail.com">It is my recollection that in Germany
we said Brich Shemei (except for Yiskor) only on the Shabbos before Sh'vuos
and on the Shabbos before Tisha B'Av.</a></u></blockquote>
Shabbat Shalom
<br>steve
<br>&nbsp;</html>

--------------E859CEDC17B8D12639B26985--

Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 08:48:53 -0400
From: richard_wolpoe@ibi.com
Subject: Anonymity of RW - Humor Alert

This whole RW being anonymous is really annoying!

I've been RW all my life, and I do not consider myself anonymous!

(By RW of course I refer to my initials - Rich Wolpoe <smile>)
	but you were not RRW until you joined here!

Gershon

From: Sammy Ominsky <sambo@charm.net>
Subject: Re: Brich Shmmeh... Should we say it?

Why is there any question? Even if the minhag somewhere is not to say it,
what reason could there be for saying davka "We don't say that"? Fine, so
maybe it's not in your siddur. Was it taken out, or never put in?
	I know that some yeshivos don't say it.  The reason, I believe,  is that
it is a tefila beloshon Arami which is a no-no.  I likewise don't see why
you can't say it belachash,  since even tefila beloshon Arami is
permitted belachash,  a` la the Targum of Kedusha Desidra.

Gershon

From: "Akiva Atwood" <atwood@netvision.net.il>
Subject: RE: Bnei Torah and Tolerance

How many people today know how to make tefillin? I'm a (non-practicing)
Sofer. I know how to write. I could probably make kosher ink. Klaf from
scratch (i.e. a fresh hide)? unlikely, but possible. Batim? I've seen it
done, with hydraulic presses and calipers. If I had to start from
scratch? I
know enough engineering to attempt it.
	I am not sure why not being able to make tefilin is equivalent to
forgetting how they're supposed to look.  Even if virtually nobody now
can make their own tefilin,  do they therefore think that tefilin are
parshios tied directly onto your arm i.e. no batim?  I think I may be
missing the point here.

Gershon

From: "Feldman, Mark" <MFeldman@CM-P.COM>
Subject: Re: kidra chaysa-Tangential point

From: richard_wolpoe@ibi.com
Subject: kidra chaysa-Tangential point 

Question: Isn't every case of a ocholent pot raided at midnight "ossur 
bechazora"?
Don't you have to remove it from the flame in order to ladel it out? 
Wouldn't ladelling it out and returning it to th fire consitute chazoro
regardless of kidra chyaso, maachol drusoi, etc.?  I guess there MIGHT be
an exemption if the cholent was 100% mevushal kol tzorko before Shabbos,
but I'm not clear on this either...
	We paskin that a mevushal kol tzorcho on a kira grufa o ketuma is mutar
bachazara. This translates to a fully cooked cholent Friday night,  (the
fact that some say it's better on Shabbos [what do they know!] does not
mean it is not fully cooked already on Friday night) removed from the
fire for dishing out purposes,  being returned to the blech thereafter. 
Yochlu anavim veyisba'au.

Gershon

From: "Noah Witty" <nwitty@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: kidrah chaysa

My point was that it has to be cooked before shabbos so that it might
still
be eaten on YT and that this rule obtains whether its YT rishon or sheni,
the only difference being that since YTR is d'oraisa, failure to comply
could very well be a chiyuv malkos for bishul be-YT she-lo le-tzorech YT.
	Another poster pointed me to the simon in SA on Eruv Tavshilin.  While
SA says nothing about it,  the MB brings beshem acharonim that foods
should be fully cooked before Shabbos so that the ET is added to the
ho'il ve'i miklai orchim,  the bishul would not be mid'oraisa and the ET
can fix that.  He says this is particularly important for YT rishon, 
hence the distinction drawn by another poster between YTR and YTS.   I
presume this is what you mean.

	Again, that was not what I was referring to when I quoted Rav Henkin
z"l.

Gershon

Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 12:23:52 +0200
From: "Carl M. Sherer" <csherer@netvision.net.il>
Subject: Re: A Tad of Perspective

On 27 Oct 99, at 23:06, Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M wrote:

 While it makes for stirring debate, the odds are that
> no matter what happens, no one will be yotzei l'tarbus ra'ah as a
result of
> yo'atzos. There is a good chance that it will enhance shemiras mitzvos,
> despite potential pitfalls, and definite reason for cautious optimism
(with
> a healthy dollop of trepidation and a drop of suspicion :-) ).

If you had put it that way to start with, I'm not sure we would have 
had much of a debate :-) 
	If I recall correctly lo these many digests later,  this is exactly how
RYGB put it initially.  In response to a post that the (descriptive
deleted) were an unalloyed good with which nobody could disagree,  RYGB
said that this was not true and that there were legitimate concerns.  He
did not say that they were an evil plot to push us down the slippery
slope.  

Gershon

R' Carl Sherer wrote:

<snip>

I apologize for the length of this post (I guess I will now find out if 
Avodah has a line limit :-); this is a topic I could go on about for 
days. But the bottom line is that RYGB is 100% correct - the 
situation in EY is bad and getting worse, and until we find a way to 
resolve it, we don't deserve to have Mashiach come. It may be 
heading towards this in the US as well, R"L, but you're nowhere 
near as far along as we are.
	A most grateful yasher koach on expressing these problems so eloquently.
 I have been hearing these problems second hand from friends and
relatives in EY for a long time and you really have put it very well. 
Now,  if some solutions were to be suggested beyond "move here and you'll
help solve the problem."

	In general,  the recent volume due to the yoatzot issue seems to have
salutary effect:  solid posts on this topic,  on involvement in
non-specifically Jewish agenda,  Daas Torah,  Tznius,  etc.  I guess once
the juices are flowing...

Gershon
- -- Carl

From: Saul Weinreb <sweinr1@uic.edu>
Subject: anonimity

I can see both sides of the anonimity issue, however I want to once again
suggest something that I've already suggested several weeks ago.  In a
sense, we are all "anonymous" on this list.  Even if we type our names,
it
remains unknown to the listmembers, almost any other piece of identifying
information about us.  I would like to get to know our listmembers a
little
better.  How about access on aishdas.org to short bio's on every list
member?  I would love to get to know the variety of people that
contribute
to our group's discussions.
Shaul Weinreb
	OK,  here goes :	

	Please indicate your usual Shabbos/Shabbat head covering:

1. Shtreimel (any color)
2. Beaver hat (black)
3. Upturned felt hat (black)
4. Downturned felt hat (black)
5. Kipa Sruga (any color)

	Please indicate your Internet access:

1.  Email only but not if anyone is looking
2.  Email only no matter who is looking
3.  WWW for work only
4.  WWW and chat rooms
5.  T-1 line at home

	Please indicate your television access:

1.  No TV, radio or newspapers
2.  No TV
3.  Only for the news
4.  We censor what the kids watch
5.  DVD projection set

	Please indicate your preference of newspaper:

1.  Der Yid
2.  Yoseid (sorry!)
3.  Yated
4.  New York Times
5.  Village Voice

	Please indicate your level of secular education:

1.  Fors gred
2.  High School
3.  COPE or equivalent
4.  Bachelor's degree
5.  Professional (MD/JD/DDS/PhD)

	My email client does not allow it,  but these are to be arranged in a
grid from right to left.  Scores are totaled and graded according to the
type of criteria immortalized by the Reader's Digest  (x-y Rabid Right
Wing, a-b Right Wing,  etc.)

	I invite all list members to submit their own contributions to the
questionnaire.  I nominate Micha to score the results;  whereupon anyone
posting to the list will add their score to their email signature so we
all kno their bias at the outset.

My apologies to any whom I have unintentionally offended   
And, seriously,  I think Shaul's suggestion is an excellent one.

Gershon

>   >>
> How about tkiat shofar? Tashrat Tashat Tarat etc. - I'm sure
> people would
> remember how many kolot and whether it was sobs or shrieks.
>

You are? I'm not -- and there's no book to look it up in except, possibly, a
Torah scroll.

Akiva

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

--- Joel Margolies <margol@ms.com> wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> There is a sefer I once saw in the Young Israel of
> Century City in LA which I
> believe was entitled Minhagei Ashkenaz.  One of the
> articles was on this topic and
> if I remeber correctly, the author said that brich
> shmeh was only added to siddurim
> in the last 100 years.  The major poskim and earlier
> authorities all railed against
> it due to several very problematic phrases in the
> text (Bar Elakin - being one
> -clearly it refers to angels - but the uneducated
> might think it refers to something
> else...).
> 
> If I remember correctly, I believe the tefilah was
> introduced in chassidic siddurim
> and as the chassidic influence grew, it infiltrated
> the "ashkenazic norm".
> 
> Therefore - there is a very good reason for people
> to say "I don't say Brich
> Shmeh...".  Please correct me - but I believe that
> the GR"A also did not say this
> tefilah.
> 
> Take care,
> 
> Joel

The Sefer is called Shroshei Minhag Ashkenaz, and I
believe you are correct in all of the above. The
source for the Tfila of Brich Shmey is the Zohar and
was not mesakain by the Anshe Kenneses Ha Gedolah but
by the Geonim Reshonim.  But the Tefila was never
accepted by Chachme Israel and did not establish it as
part of Tefila. It is not mentioned at all in the
words of the Rishonim.  It was apparently only the
Arizal's custum to say it.

R. Yom Tov Lipman Heller ( the Author of Tosfos Yom
Tov) spoke favorably of it in one of his sforim. It
seems that only after this event were the first
sidurim published that contained Brich Shmey as part
of Hotzoas Sefer Torah. No other sidurim of the time
contained it.

HM

=====

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