Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 098

Tuesday, November 2 1999

• Re: AZ versus kefirah?
• Re: The Fellowship of Christians and Jews
• [none]
• Denigration of Bekiyus?!
• Re: Bekiyut -- Who needs it?
• Re: AZ vs kefirah?
• Re: Tephillin Dates
• Re: Re: Catch up learning
• Re: Re: Catch up learning
• Conspicuous Consumption, Luxury, Tzni'us, Etc. [was What Els
• Re: Poverty and secular studies
• Shittuf For A Ben Noach
• gedolei Torah or Torah based society
• Re: gedolei Torah or Torah based society
• Re: gedolei Torah or Torah based society
• Denigration of Bekiyus?!
• Re: Conspicuous Consumption, Luxury, Tzni'us, Etc. [was What Els
• Re[2]: gedolei Torah or Torah based society

In a message dated 11/2/99 1:52:43 PM EST, bergez01@med.nyu.edu writes:

> >btw, I am curious to know what the classic texts say about Avodo Zoro vs. 
a 
>  >totally G-dless POV.
>  
>  >Rich Wolpoe
>  
>  kol hakoyfer beavoyde zore nekra yehudi (Megila, I think, 13?).  I've 
> forgotten the sugya, but it
>  seems this gives at least one side of the story:  being in opposition to 
a"z 
> is sufficient (but not necessary?) for (a kind of) Jewishness.  But OTOH 
the 
> term "yehudi" probably assumes belief in God, too.  
  
(I didn't follow this entire thread so I may have this out of context), The 
first Mitzvah that the Rambam mentions is "Leida Shyesh Shom E-loka" , and as 
the Rambam rules in Hil. Tshuva 3:7 that one that says "Ein Shom E-loka" is a 
Min (and see Kesef Mishneh and Lechem Mishneh there).

Kol Tuv

Yitzchok Zirkind

     Rich Wolpoe wrote:
     
     >>I guess the bottom line is this: which is worse? Avodo Zoro or 
     Kofeir bakol (iow a belief in NO G-d whatsoever)>>
     
     I think this is a machlokes Rashi and the Rambam.
     
     The Rambam says explicitly in his Iggeres Teiman that it is worse to 
     be a kofeir bakol.  R. Yosef Kaffih emphasizes this in his footnotes.  
     On Yirmiyahu 2:13 "For My people have committed two evils: they have 
     forsaken Me, the fountain of living waters, and hewed them out 
     cisterns, broken cisterns, that can hold no water" Rashi says that not 
     only were they kofeir on Hashem but, even worse, they worshipped 
     avodah zara.  Perhaps it can be argued that since xianity is shittuf 
     the above does not apply to it and even Rashi would agree that total 
     kefirah is worse.
     

     Rich Wolpoe wrote:
     
     >>I guess the bottom line is this: which is worse? Avodo Zoro or 
     Kofeir bakol (iow a belief in NO G-d whatsoever)>>
     
     I think this is a machlokes Rashi and the Rambam.
     
     The Rambam says explicitly in his Iggeres Teiman that it is worse to 
     be a kofeir bakol.  R. Yosef Kaffih emphasizes this in his footnotes.  
     On Yirmiyahu 2:13 "For My people have committed two evils: they have 
     forsaken Me, the fountain of living waters, and hewed them out 
     cisterns, broken cisterns, that can hold no water" Rashi says that not 
     only were they kofeir on Hashem but, even worse, they worshipped 
     avodah zara.  Perhaps it can be argued that since xianity is shittuf 
     the above does not apply to it and even Rashi would agree that total 
     kefirah is worse.
     

Hmm...

Seems like we have a growth industry in denigrating bekiyus here.

Reminds me of R' Yisroel Salanter's comment upon hearing a shiur from R'
Chaim Brisker: "HKB"H is preparing a gadol for the next generation".

V'ha'mayvin yavin.

Rabbosai, as one who is dedicated to iyun lock stock and barrel, it is,
nevertheless, essential that we realize that there is not true iyun without
the broadest possible knowledge.

For example, it is not possible to properly understand Bavli without
Yerushalmi. Ihave never learnt anything more lomdish than Yerushalmi
Yevamos. They say R' Aharon Kotler's shiurim on Yevamos drew heavily on the
Yerushalmi. I understand why.

It is not possible to undertand Bavli without the rest of Bavli.

I know yeshivos don't always stress this, but most of us here are older. It
is time to grow up (tartei mashma).

We are not going to be Rogatchovers (or even Or Samei'achs). Too American
:-). But we must do all we can do.

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

--- richard_wolpoe@ibi.com wrote:
> [RYZ wrote:] 
><<See Gemara end of Hoirius, Sinai Veokeir Horim, ( Boir Sud vs.
> Mayon 
> Hamisgabeir), and keeping in mind that Divrei Torah Aniyim Bmokom
> Echod Vashirim
> Bmokom Acheir, so Bekius adds even into Iyun, (that is in addition
> to Eizehu 
> Talmid Chochom... and Bar Pachsi etc. etc.)>>

> BEFORE printing, 
> there was a definite advantage to a Sinai over an Okeir Horim, but
> since the 
> advent of printing, Seofrim could close the "Sinai" gap and it was
> our taks to 
> become more of an Okeir Horim.  

I would go one step further.  Scholars generally believe that the
heter of writing down Torah she'be'alpeh was not made use of in
Talmudic times (i.e., the amoraim studied Mishnayot be'alpeh and
memorized the sugyot in the Talmud).  One could argue that already in
the time of the Rishonim, when Torah she'be'alpeh was written down
without hesitation, much of the advantage of the Sinai over the Okeir
Harim had been eroded.

Kol tuv,
Moshe


=====

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

Gil Student:
: The Rambam says explicitly in his Iggeres Teiman that it is worse to be a
: kofeir bakol. R. Yosef Kaffih emphasizes this in his footnotes. On Yirmiyahu
: 2:13 "For My people have committed two evils: they have forsaken Me, the
: fountain of living waters, and hewed them out cisterns, broken cisterns,
: that can hold no water" Rashi says that not only were they kofeir on Hashem
: but, even worse, they worshipped avodah zara.

My inclination is to side with Rashi on this one.

Contemporary "normative" hashkafah is that the key to olam haba is in being
good.

The Rambam, OTOH, is pretty clear in the Moreh that the value in being good is
that it brings similarity to the borei. That the whole point of avodah is to
provide many opportunities to have an epiphany and obtain a yedi'ah of HKBH
(see his understanding of Ratzah HKBH lizakos es Yisrael...) According to the
Rambam, this yedi'ah has nitzchiyus because it shares elements of the "Tzurah"
of HKBH, who is nitzchi. People who altogether lack such yedi'ah are therefore
doomed to kareis, ceasing to exist after misah. And the greater the yedi'ah,
the greater the cheilek li'Olam haba.

So of course he considers AZ the worst possible evil.

As the Rambam's position is so unlike what most of us believe today, I would
similarly doubt whether his conclusion is in concert with the dirachim we
follow.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for  2-Nov-99: Shelishi, Sara
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 62b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         

As background to this post, I want to explain that I have worked in
a number of non-professional counselling settings, and while none of the
following information is drawn from that experience, I think the sense
that I'm someone who is not shocked by anything carries over into my
dealings with acquaintances, because somehow I end up knowing such things.

> I agree. I was merely pointing out that the
> sociological phenomenon of having pre-marital sex (RL)
> did and probably does still exist amongst our own
> Orthodox bretheren.  Whether Teffilin are brought or
> not, is besides the point. 

On the general tefillin date phenomenon:  I don't personally know of any
instances, but my guess is that someone who would do this would avoid the 
kareit, and probably not with tevila, so I'm not sure you're asking precisely 
the right question.

> The question we should all
> be asking is how common is it, and does it cut accross
> the RW/LW spectrum? Or is it the exclusive terrain of
> the Left?

This isn't a verifiable question, though, and I'm not sure what is
gained by wondering.  Personally, I'd be very interested if a survey could 
be done of the entire Jewish community (both O and non-O) to see to what
degree restrictions on the mixing of the sexes lowers pre-marital activity,
but in the real world, the only information we could learn from such a 
survey is to what degree people feel they can tell the truth about their 
sexual activity.

I have first-hand knowledge that it is not the exclusive terrain of LW, 
but even if we tabulated all the cases we knew about and charted them,
that wouldn't do much better than the above survey.  

I do have the sense that there is a certain point where separation of the
sexes might become counterproductive for some people, engendering an
unhealthy curiousity about the immediate reason for the separation.  
In communities where boys and girls have more casual contact and even
friendships, they have a familiarity which may make them more likely to
transgress, but at the same time they have the means to satisfy their
interest in the opposite sex through acceptable means, e.g. conversation.

Another thought is that this ultimately comes down to a question of
intent:  those who really care about the mitzvot are extremely careful
to fulfill them, and those who do not truly care are careless all around.  
The few datapoints I have (most are from expressed attitudes, rather
than action) are from people who are also careless in their personal 
observance (e.g., saying brachot).  

The direction of causality here isn't clear to me:  is it that they are 
careless to begin with, and thus a transgression isn't a problem for
them, or is it that they are somehow frustrated by the restrictions and 
are rebelling in all directions?  

Janet

--- "Carl M. Sherer" <csherer@netvision.net.il> wrote:
> On 2 Nov 99, at 9:39, gil.student@citicorp.com
> wrote:

> It may be a novel way of putting it, but if you want
> your kid to have 
> a shot at being a gadol, you improve his chances
> greatly if you 
> come on aliya. 
> 

I think my totally American kid has a pretty good shot
at it.  And he's got an American HS diploma as well as
an American college degree.

HM

=====

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

He ain't totally American no more...

BTW, where was that American college degree from :-)...?

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

----- Original Message ----- 
From: harry maryles <hmaryles@yahoo.com>
To: <avodah@aishdas.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 1999 2:09 PM
Subject: Re: Re: Catch up learning


> I think my totally American kid has a pretty good shot
> at it.  And he's got an American HS diploma as well as
> an American college degree.
> 

My prior posts on this subject have been based on two related underlying
premises:

1. Material wealth constitutes a pikadon entrusted to a person by Hashem, which
the person should use primarily (a) to meet his and his family's basic needs,
and (b)
to serve Hashem (including engaging in acts of tzedaka and g'milus chasadim).

2. A person should exercise restraint and moderation in the pursuit,
acquisition, display
and enjoyment of material goods and pleasures, with the guiding principle being
to maximize
avodas Hashem, act l'shem shamayim in all things, and remain focused on the
g'ula
ha'asida, olam haba and the real purpose of our lives.

I derive these premesis from various Torah sources, some of which have been
cited in my
prior posts, and consider them very fundamental. My knowledge of Torah is of
course quite
limited and imperfect, so I may not know all the relevant sources, misunderstand
those that
I do know and, consequently, operate on the basis of flawed premises. I would be
very glad to
discuss on the list the sources and their proper interpretation, as well as the
validity of my
premises and their proper practical applications.

I am  troubled, however, by the approach of some posters who, apparently
disagreeing
with these premises or my practical application of them, have labeled those
applications
as socialist or ascetic (or as deriving from an ascetic mentality). Although
probably not
intended as such, that is a subtle variety of name-calling that makes it very
difficult to deal
with the sources and the issues on their merits. The same would be the case if I
responded
with charges of capitalism and hedonism to those who think unlimited spending on
weddings
is a good thing.

I don't deny that my first premise has wealth-redistributive consequences. It
certainly does,
but not because I or any of my sources are socialists. Likewise, my second
premise limits
indulgence in worldly pleasures, but not because I or any of my sources are
ascetics. One
can certainly reject asceticism and still consistently maintain either or both
of these premises
(as I believe Rambam does in chapter 3 of Hilchos Dayos). Both premises are also
consistent
with the rejection of socialism. 

Ramchal was a m'kubal who practiced asceticism. We do not, for that reason,
dismiss his classic statement in Mesilas Yesharim (ch. 1) of our purpose in the
world.
R' Yosef Caro was also a m'kubal who practiced asceticism, but we do not
therefore
question his classic statement in O.Ch. 231of our duty always to act l'shem
shamayim.

Whether the authors of Shnay Luchos Habris, Kli Yakar or Peleh Yoetz were
escetics (or had escetic mentalities) is similarly irrelevant to evaluating the
propositions
for which I cited them, which have nothhing to do with ascetic practices like
self-imposed
exile, immersion in an icy mikva, rolling in the snow or denying oneself
reasonable
quantities of food and sleep.

If these premises or my practical application of them is wrong, it is because I
have missed
or misinterpreted relevant sources, or drawn invalid conclusions from the
premises. That's
what we should be discussing on the list.

Kol tuv,
David

It's not the "Union Card" ie degree that matters. I don't think I have to point
out to the majority of members of this distinguished list the benefits of a double
program.


Carl and Adina Sherer wrote:

> I would only add that while a college degree is required for nearly
> all types of parnassa in the US, that is not true in EY (and I
> understand that it is not true in England either). We don't have
> many sanitation engineers with BA's in Philosophy here :-)
>
> -- Carl
>
> Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for our son,
> Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.
> Thank you very much.
>
> Carl and Adina Sherer
> mailto:sherer@actcom.co.il

 Harry Maryles wrote:
 
 >>a Christian ( who, according to most Rishonim is not an Oved Avodah 
 Zorah as Goyim are not commanded against Shtuf, i.e. the Trinity)>>
 
 Easy with the "most Rishonim."  I firmly believe that most rishonim and 
 poskim hold that shittuf is assur for a ben noach.  In fact, I think that 
 the only major rishon to say that it is muttar is the Meiri.  The Rambam 
 is very clear on this matter.  Tosafos in Bechoros 3a is unclear (which 
 led to the Rema and Shach being lenient) but the Tosafos Rid is clear that 
 it is assur.  Tosafos in Avodah Zara 2a also implies that it is assur (as 
 explained by the Minchas Elazar 1:73).  Which rishon other than the Meiri 
 is lenient?  The Noda Biyehudah, R. Akiva Eiger, Chasam Sofer, Minchas 
 Elazar, Sefas Emes, Minchas Chinuch, Grach, and Griz are all 
 poskim/acharonim who are machmir.

One posting:
<<If a society is to be run according to torah values, then we must have dati 
professionals able to fill all essential roles.  If our sole aim is to have "gdolim b'torah".... 
we cannot have other options outside torah>>

And one answer:
<< if we all learned all the time then all else would be naaseh al yidei acherim.>>

And when the day arrives that Beret Israel is an all Jewish state in which everyone is 
learning Torah exclusively, who will build the houses, supply the food, generate power, 
etc., etc., etc.

 Isn't there something basically wrong with a religion that cannot exist without 
non-believers, irreligious Jews or goy. How then can the ideal in Israel be everyone 
studying Torah to the exclusion of the essential knowledge needed to run and improve 
society.

In a message dated 11/2/99 3:32:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
dbnet@barak-online.net writes:

> And when the day arrives that Beret Israel is an all Jewish state in which 
> everyone is 
>  learning Torah exclusively, who will build the houses, supply the food, 
> generate power, 
>  etc., etc., etc.
>  
Vomdu Zarim Vrou... Ubnei Neichar Ikoreichem.

Kol Tuv

Yitzchok Zirkind

In a message dated 11/2/99 3:32:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
dbnet@barak-online.net writes:

<< 
 And one answer:
 << if we all learned all the time then all else would be naaseh al yidei 
acherim.>>
 
 And when the day arrives that Beret Israel is an all Jewish state in which 
everyone is 
 learning Torah exclusively, who will build the houses, supply the food, 
generate power, 
 etc., etc., etc.
 
  Isn't there something basically wrong with a religion that cannot exist 
without 
 non-believers, irreligious Jews or goy. >>
Lshitatam - no
Kol Tuv,
Joel Rich

When my 2 kids fight over" "which one do I love the most?" I tell thme which is 
more a part of me, my right arm or my left arm?

Any good derech will certainly train BOTH arms!

The question is HOW!

RYBS and Briskers in general seemed (IMHO) to see Bekios as flowing out of 
Iyyun...

EG, when you dig deeply into a sugyo and get all the rishonim and the ein 
mishpot etc. you will encounter on your path numerous xref's  to other sugyos, 
etc.  After spending years in iyyun, a very desirable by-product will be a 
tremednous bekios, w/o ever targetting it directly by having a bekios seder!

What the Rav objected too {primarily} IMHO was sitting down to learn GEMORO 
bekios.

Rightfully one should follow the derech of limud as out,lined in Avos, etc. and 
the Rambam, a braod base of Mikro and Mishno first.  

L'olom hevei rotz achar haMishno!  And certainly nowadays where the perisuhim on
Mishnayos are authored by beki'im who will point out salient xref's.  So the 
aleph beis of bekios ought to be Mishno, n'est-ce pas?!

I would re-iterate that if you wanted to get a real broad-based bekios in 
addition to shas Mishnayos, how about Rambam's Yad? Tur/BY?  how about Mei'ri?
Perhaps Rif?

According to this model, Gemoro and Tosfos, etc. should be learned  exlusively 
(or at least primarily be'iyyun). And after moeli kreiso bebikus, you can start 
learning Mikro Misho etc. b'iyyun, too. 

Rich Wolpoe



______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________

Hmm...

Seems like we have a growth industry in denigrating bekiyus here.

<snip>

It is not possible to undertand Bavli without the rest of Bavli.


Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer

--- david.nadoff@bfkpn.com wrote:
> I am  troubled, however, by the approach of some posters who,
> apparently
> disagreeing
> with these premises or my practical application of them, have
> labeled those
> applications
> as socialist or ascetic (or as deriving from an ascetic mentality).
> Although
> probably not
> intended as such, that is a subtle variety of name-calling that
> makes it very
> difficult to deal
> with the sources and the issues on their merits. The same would be
> the case if I
> responded
> with charges of capitalism and hedonism to those who think
> unlimited spending on
> weddings
> is a good thing.
> 
<snip>

I don't understand why you view asceticism as a negative attribute. 
I don't (in fact, I went through an ascetic stage when I was 19 or
so).  Asceticism is an extremely valid derech towards Avodat Hashem. 
Thus, there is no comparison to be made with a "charge" of hedonism.

For that matter, I too wrote attacking certain luxurious practices
(see my post of Sunday: <<People who can barely afford the luxuries
are more likely to put energy into striving for them; this changes
their priorities and makes wealth/luxury acquisition into more of an
ovodah zara.>>)  So you cannot accuse me of raising the asceticism
issue in order to avoid discussion of the core issue of the fixation
on luxury in the US.

> Ramchal was a m'kubal who practiced asceticism. We do not, for that
> reason,
> dismiss his classic statement in Mesilas Yesharim (ch. 1) of our
> purpose in the
> world.
> R' Yosef Caro was also a m'kubal who practiced asceticism, but we
> do not
> therefore
> question his classic statement in O.Ch. 231of our duty always to
> act l'shem
> shamayim.

However, as I said in a previous post: I remember that Rabbi Yaakov
Neuberger, in his Choson class, suggested that the ascetic
recommendations of the Shulchan Arukh regarding lessening the
pleasure one has during marital relations are not appropriate in
today's times.  So, an ascetic tendency can influence halakhic
statements.

> 
> Whether the authors of Shnay Luchos Habris, Kli Yakar or Peleh
> Yoetz were
> escetics (or had escetic mentalities) is similarly irrelevant to
> evaluating the
> propositions
> for which I cited them, which have nothhing to do with ascetic
> practices like
> self-imposed
> exile, immersion in an icy mikva, rolling in the snow or denying
> oneself
> reasonable
> quantities of food and sleep.

If a person has ascetic tendencies, they may manifest themselves in
the extreme ways you mention, but they will also have an impact upon
how the person views pleasure in general, even if one could
technically explain why a non-ascetic could hold such a view.

You stated in the name of the Shal"ah that the pursuit of pleasure
<<. . . constitute a hesech hada'as in the anticipation of the g'ula
(Shal"a, end of M'seches Suka).>>

It is my gut feeling (which I would appreciate someone bearing out)
that this statement might derive from an ascetic mentality.  "Hesech
hada'as in the anticipation of the g'ula" which would seem to me to
preclude any pleasure which is very enjoyable.  I would be surprised
if a chassidic master known for his appreciation of pleasure as part
of Avodat Hashem would make such a statement.  

Sometimes, adding labels to a conversation clouds over certain
issues.  I believe that adding the issue of ascetism to this
conversation may be enlightening.  Which rishonim/achronim were known
to be ascetic or to not be ascetic?  What correlation is there
between their asceticism/non-asceticism and the making of statements
such as "hesech hada'as in the anticipation of the g'ula"?

As I pointed out in a previous post, our generation has not embraced
ascetism.  Therefore statements made from an ascetic perspective will
resonate less with members of our generation.  To the extent that a
known non-ascetic rishon/achron makes a pleasure-curbing statement,
that statement will have greater impact than if made by a known
ascetic.

Kol tuv,
Moshe

=====

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

  >>Isn't there something basically wrong with a religion that cannot exist 
without 
 non-believers, irreligious Jews or goy. >>
Lshitatam - no
Kol Tuv,
Joel Rich<<

Leimo ketanoi, the "chareidim" hold like RSBY, nasseh al yedei acheirim?

Rich Wolpoe

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


[ 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         ]