Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 102

Wednesday, November 3 1999

• Re: gedolei Torah or Torah based society
• Re: gedolei Torah or Torah based society
• Men's Roles
• Fw: Bekius
• Re: gedolei Torah or Torah based society
• Scholars in Residence,Newsweek article
• Re: Baruch Sheim and Yehei Sh'mei
• Re: Friendly fundamentalists
• Re: Bios (was: kidra chaysa)
• Re: Scholars in Residence,Newsweek article
• Re: Baruch Sheim and Yehei Sh'mei
• Re: Baruch Sheim and Yehei Sh'mei
• ed echad
• Re: Scholars in Residence,Newsweek article
• Re: Baruch Sheim and Yehei Sh'mei
• Rabbenu Yonah
• Re: secular education and Lubavitch
• Re: Baruch Sheim and Yehei Sh'mei
• Re: Tephillin Dates/Dichotomous lifestyles

>  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.
>
There's no problem with the religion in its foundations.
Ideally (perhaps only in yemot Hamashiach, I hope before then) the people
sitting and learning will be Leviim and yechidim.
Everyone else will follow a chassidishe type derech-  working and koveya
itim.  Goyim will follow 7 mitzvot bnei No'ach and non believers will be
enlightened. Perfectly viable.
We just have to get ourselves there. :-)  >

     >>Firstly, with our recent discussion of anoymity, pro and con, it 
     would be nice to know who Mr. "Gil Student" is, so I know whom I am 
     addressing.>>
     
     Gil Student is, in fact, my name.  Many on this list already know me 
     personally (including your sister and brother-in-law).  I am a RIETS 
     alumnus (non-ordained) who tries very hard to be yeshivish, often 
     unsuccessfully to my dismay.  Any more details as per Geshon Dubin's 
     survey (who introduced me to this list) are being withheld until my 
     children are married off safely.
     
     
     >>That having been said, it is also incumbent upon those who would 
     advance their philosophy to be aware of the counerclaims of opposing 
     philosophies.
     
     In this case, the Litvishe yeshiva world is based on the philosophy of 
     the Nefesh Ha'Chaim, who, in Sha'ar Aleph, paskens like RSBY over R' 
     Yishmael.  Ayain sham heiteiv.>>
     
     Interesting.  Does anyone know of any earlier mekoros who pasken 
     likewise?

In a message dated 11/2/99 11:04:33 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
owner-avodah@aishdas.org writes:

I wrote:
>   One possible thought - "beZeias Apecha Tochal Lechem," and working for a 
>   living. This is problematic, though, for many obvious reasons - men who 
>  don't  need to work, for example.

Joel Rich responded:
>  Not so obvious - if there is a redemptive quality to work (ie becoming a 
>  partner with Hashem in creation - see Vayikra Rabba 25:3) then "needing" 
>  (financial need I assume) is not necessarily the only issue

I will pose a stronger problem, then, which should highlight the general 
problem: Women are supposed to involve themselves in their role, and not 
cross over into a man's role. Presumably, the converse is also true - men 
should involve themselves in their role, and not cross over into a woman's 
role. A long tradition has established that a woman's role is defined by "Kol 
Kevodah Bas Melech Pinimah." My question is what, precisely, defines a man's 
role.

If, as you are willing to entertain, a man's role is that of working, that 
amounts to saying that a woman should not work. Yet we have numerous examples 
of women who worked. Further, what should a single woman do?

Mordechai Torczyner
HaMakor! http://www.aishdas.org/hamakor Mareh Mekomos Reference Library
WEBSHAS! http://www.aishdas.org/webshas Indexing the Talmud, Daf by Daf
Congregation Ohave Shalom, Pawtucket, RI http://members.tripod.com/~ohave

RGD asks, below, a legitimate question :-).

The answer is, of course, that I replied to the wrong copy. Here is the
unexpurgated reply to his query of me yesterday.

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

----- Original Message -----
From: Gershon Dubin <gershon.dubin@juno.com>
To: <sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 1999 4:56 AM
Subject: Re: Bekius


> Why did you take this answer off list?
>
> Gershon
>
>
> On Tue, 2 Nov 1999 23:32:38 -0600 "Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M.
> Bechhofer" <sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu> writes:
> > The post-RCBrisker lomdus in vogue in the yeshiva world requires
> > little or
> > no bekiyus. There is little or no cross referencing nor hyperlinking
> > abstract parallel concepts to each other, to compare, contrast and
> > resolve.
> > It is not deemed essential to, say, clarify what zikka is by combing
> > through
> > Yerushalmi and Bavli Yevamos and write a kuntres, like R' Meir
> > Simcha did.
> > It is sufficient to "boi ois" yesodos based on kashya-teirutz ("af'n
> > ort").
> > Remember the story about how they switched mareh mekomos on R'
> > Yisroel? His
> > shiurim were based on the breadth of Torah no less than its depth.
> >
> > Let me hasten to say that I am a post-RCB yeshiva bochur and learn
> > as such
> > (and write seforim as such) myself. But I am trying to do what I can
> > to
> > expand my horizons.
>

First, let me again apologize to you for assuming that your e-mail address
was not your name. Please forgive me, as that assumption was reflected in
the tenor of my post.

L'gufo shel inyan, I do not know of any earlier sources for RCV's
perspective. From a socio-historical perspective, since RCV is a primary
source for Litvishe Yeshiva Hashkofo, it does not matter. But, of course,
from an interpretive perspective re the Gemara and its meaning, of course it
would be nice to find something earleir. As I said, don't know!

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


----- Original Message -----
From: <gil.student@citicorp.com>
To: <avodah@aishdas.org>; <sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 1999 8:26 AM
Subject: Re: gedolei Torah or Torah based society


>      In this case, the Litvishe yeshiva world is based on the philosophy
of
>      the Nefesh Ha'Chaim, who, in Sha'ar Aleph, paskens like RSBY over R'
>      Yishmael.  Ayain sham heiteiv.>>
>
>      Interesting.  Does anyone know of any earlier mekoros who pasken
>      likewise?
>
>

FWIW, as a former talmid of RSY Weinberg ZTL, my impression is that he emulated 
the Torah aspects of RYBS while discarding the YU/Mizrachi political aspects.

I think R. Weinberg wanted the Rav's Torah and macshovo, etc. in a more 
yeshivishe environment.  His styule of learning,  -particularly the Rambam - I 
think were modeled on the Rav.

It is also my impression that there were warm personal connections between the 
Rav and the Feinstein's who were after all his cousins.

IOW, there was a small but signifcant contingent of the Yeshivishe velt that 
disagreed with the Rav's YU affiliation but did so most respectfully.



______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
 with the notable exception of Rav Shmuel Yaakov Weinberg Zl.

Micha Berger wrote:


> 
> I thought the identification was made on the basis of the two versions of
> the aggadita. In the medrash, when the sons say "Shema Yisrael", Yaakov
> replies "Baruch sheim...". However in shas, where the story is in Aramaic,
> Yaakov's reply is "Yehei shemei raba...".
> 


Really? Source, please. I don't recall this at all.


---sam

In a message dated 11/2/99 7:16:08 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
hmaryles@yahoo.com writes:

<< 
 Is there anyone raised in the US who doesn't know the
 words to Jingle Bells, no matter how right wing a
 Yeshiva he went to? 
 What does that prove?  I couldn't care less if public
 schools have Christmas trees anymore than I care if
 there is a national Christmas tree on the White house
 lawn. >>

Look,
At this point I just have to say that if you weren't there, you can't 
possibly understand. Your above posted statement proves that.

Jordan

In a message dated 11/2/99 10:58:36 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
gershon.dubin@juno.com writes:

<< I often wonder if the person standing next to me in shul or at mincha at
 work or wherever,  is a person with whom I am in the midst of a most
 interesting conversation on the list (or maybe the person who just blew
 me away,  figuratively speaking,  on the list).   >>

I met Moshe Feldman at a wedding talking to my old friend Eliyahu Teitz in 
just this fashion. Avi Feldblum and I met in person for the first time when 
we turned out to be seated together at the Bar Mitzvah Moshe Bernstein 
recently made for his son, Michael. So, you never know......

Jordan 

In a message dated 11/3/99 9:55:24 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
richard_wolpoe@ibi.com writes:

<< It is also my impression that there were warm personal connections between 
the 
 Rav and the Feinstein's who were after all his cousins. >>

R' Hershel Reichman told me that when he would go to MTJ in the afternoon, 
after learning by RYBS in the morning, R' Moshe would often ask, "Nu, what 
did my cousin say in shiur today?"

Jordan

In a message dated 11/3/99 9:56:31 AM Eastern Standard Time, sambo@charm.net 
writes:

> > I thought the identification was made on the basis of the two versions of
>  > the aggadita. In the medrash, when the sons say "Shema Yisrael", Yaakov
>  > replies "Baruch sheim...". However in shas, where the story is in 
Aramaic,
>  > Yaakov's reply is "Yehei shemei raba...".
>  
In Psachim 56a it says Boruch Sheim.even in the Zohar (Breishis 234b) it says 
BSKML"V, (after all didn't Yaakov speak Loshon Hakodesh?)

Kol Tuv

Yitzchok Zirkind

In a message dated 11/3/99 10:24:41 AM Eastern Standard Time, Yzkd@aol.com 
writes:

> In a message dated 11/3/99 9:56:31 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
sambo@charm.net 
>  writes:
>  
>  > > I thought the identification was made on the basis of the two versions 
> of
>  >  > the aggadita. In the medrash, when the sons say "Shema Yisrael", 
Yaakov
>  >  > replies "Baruch sheim...". However in shas, where the story is in 
>  Aramaic,
>  >  > Yaakov's reply is "Yehei shemei raba...".

Just to correct myself the part I responded to was not written by R' Sam O.

(The following was sent yesterday, but not posted in any of the seven
digests that have come out since. Was it not received, or was it deemed
inappropriate? If the latter, please explain, so I'll know what to
avoid.)
In response to my original posting, which read:

"In  #58, Russell Hendel writes, 'We learn that one witness is believed
in issur-heter from women not from men.

So....the institution of a female Rabbi was NOT CREATED by Rabbanit
Henkin. It was created by Moshe Rabaynu. 
	
Also it is logical...you can't have issuray careth involving women's
status unless you trust them.'

Am I missing something here? What does eligibility to attest have to do
with being a rabbi? If an am-haaretz gamur testifies that he saw a piece
of meat salted and soaked, he is believed.  Does this make him a rabbi,
or a posek in matters of kashrus? "
 
Dr. Hendel responded:

"Sadya here is my point--The following two cases are the same

Case 1: A women is cooking chicken soup. A cold dairy spoon (that has not
been used in 24 hours) falls in and is immediately taken out(I am
assuming the whole soup remains kosher). The women is trusted to serve
this soup as Kosher WITHOUT telling her husband what had happened.
Furthermore I think most Poskim would agree that if she had been already
advised that the soup is Kosher the last time the spoon feel in she
should not feel obligated to ASK A SHEEILAH. In other words she is
trusted.

Case 2: Same soup. Same spoon. Same falling in. Except that this women
asks her neighbor if it is Kosher and her neighbor tells her "that has
happened to me several times and it is  Kosher".

My point is simple. Torah Law (ala Moshe Rabaynu) trusts the woman in
Case 1. My point then is that the same criteria apply to case 2--in other
words the woman is equally trusted to pasken for herself or her friend
(what is the difference). 

I could create similar pairs of cases for TM and then we would have a
justification FOR SOME USES OF FEMALE YOATZOTH."

It would seem that he is not responding to my comments.  I agree
wholeheartedly that his two cases are identical.  I was not discussing at
all the matter of Yoatzot.  I was merely pointing out that the derivation
of ed echad ne'eman b'issurin has nothing at all to do with a woman being
able to pasken.  She may indeed be able to do so, but "v'safrah lah" is
not the source.  All it teaches us is that she is believed as to how many
clean days she has experienced.  That she is trusted to draw the halachic
conclusion from this fact is *not* derived from here.

Dr. Hendel writes further:

"Sadya also writes
>>>>>
If an am-haaretz gamur testifies that he saw a piece of meat salted and
soaked, he is believed.  Does this make him a rabbi, or a posek in
matters of kashrus?  
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Actually this too is my point. I would not believe an AM AHARETZ GAMUR
(your language) who told me something was Kosher. But I would believe a
Knowledgeable women and I don't see the difference
in paskening for others. In other words I am not looking at the Yoatzoth
as females but as people who studied 2000 hours."

Again, I suspect I have not made myself clear.  I didn't ask whether the
am ha'aretz gamur would be believed to say something was kosher, but
whether he is believed to attest to a fact (soaking and salting) the
consequence of which allows a knowledgeable person to decide the Halacha.
This is the exact distinction I sought to draw between what *is* derived
from ed echad ne'eman, and what Dr. Hendel sought to read into it.

Dr. Hendel concludes, "Finally Sadya writes
>>>>>>>>>>

In the same issue,  a posuk is transliterated as "vayotzei oisoi."  What
manner of word is oisoi? Bad enough that the cholam is mispronounced.
Does it also have to be mistransliterated?
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

This is infantile, false and slanderous. The "vayotzei oisoi" was made 
in a posting by Yitzchok Zirkind responding to Chaim Brown. 

Why am I being blamed for this misspelling? (If I am not being blamed why
did you put it in the posting about my one witness)  Even if I had made
it why mention it...this is Avodah you should be
concentrating on concepts not spelling?
Finally it may be slanderous since by placing this in the same posting
with your question to me you make me appear as incompetent. 

I would respectfully suggest in the future that you separate complaints
into separate postings.

I also would suggest you concentrate on concepts"

If I am guilty of a breach of Avodah ethics by (a) addressing two
different people's posting in one response and (b) concentrating on the
trivia of spelling (although it was the underlying pronunciation that I
was actually impugning), I plead beginner's inexperience and I apologize,
although it seems to me that any reasonable reading of my remarks would
make it obvious that there was no connection between them and Dr. Hendel.
 However: infantile? false? slanderous? Is this the standard of discourse
of Avodah?
Sadya N. Targum 


___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.

--- Zeliglaw@aol.com wrote:
>    have any list members seen this week's Newsweek? It has a
> fascinating book 
> excerpt of a reunion between two brothers, one a charedi baal
> teshuva and his 
> long lost brother(the author). The Bt's comment are unfortunate,
> inane and of 
> questionable halachic veracity(i.e.check out his comments on
> US/Canadian 
> customs) if he had been a Brisker, he would have recognized
> that"not 
> everything that you think should be said and that not evrything
> that you say 
> should be published"!!  Unfortunately, his views will be quoted as
> those of 
> an "authentic Torah observant Jew".    

I read the article.  It is not clear to me that the writer--who is
the brother of the BT--told his brother that he would be the subject
of a book (so it's not fair to complain that he should have been
careful in what he said to the outside world).  Also, it is clear
that the non-frum brother has negative feelings about his frum
brother and about frumkeit.

Still, it was an interesting article.

Kol tuv,
Moshe

=====

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

Yitzchok Zirkind wrote:


> 
> In a message dated 11/3/99 9:56:31 AM Eastern Standard Time, sambo@charm.net 
> writes:
> 
> > > I thought the identification was made on the basis of the two versions of
> >  > the aggadita. In the medrash, when the sons say "Shema Yisrael", Yaakov
> >  > replies "Baruch sheim...". However in shas, where the story is in 
> Aramaic,
> >  > Yaakov's reply is "Yehei shemei raba...".
> >  




I did not. Micha did. I replied asking him for the source.



> In Psachim 56a it says Boruch Sheim.even in the Zohar (Breishis 234b) it says 
> BSKML"V, (after all didn't Yaakov speak Loshon Hakodesh?)
> 


Yes, these I know. I wanted a source for what he said, since I don't
recall it.


---sam

> I would think that all list members are aware that Rabbeinu Yonah wrote 
> Shaarei teshuvah because of his role in the Maimondean controversy after 
> asking mechilah at the kever of the Rambam. 

I don't think that Rabbenu Yonah ever made it to Israel.
As for Shaare teshuva there is no indication in the sefer that this is true.
This story has been around for a long time. Does anyone know the facts?

Eli Turkel

--- Alan Davidson <perzvi@hotmail.com> wrote:

HM wrote:
> >A very close friend of mine, who married into
> >Lubavitch was very pained that all of her children
> 
> Since when do frum yidden base characterizations of
> an entire group on "a 
> very close friend of mine"?

The above situation is accurate. The reason I talk of:
 "a very close friend of mine"?
is not to generalize but to illustrate anecdotally an
existing situation.  You do not address the main point
I make, namely that an ELEMENARY school was
established without any Secular studies at all, at the
directive of the Rebbe.  Does this not speak volumes
about the Lubavitch attitude towards secular studies. 
(This may be the only area about which the Rebbe and
R. Shach agree)

> >How many FFB Lubavitchers have become MDs.
> 
> Lots -- you are going to find much fewer Lubavitcher
> college professors but 
> outside of eretz Isroel frumkeit and academe don't
> mix too neatly.

Lots? Name one Lubavitcher that was born into a Frum
Chabad family, went through their preffered schooling
program (i.e. no general studies from womb to tomb),
and went on to become an MD? If you can, he/she must
be the exception that proves the rule, and is probably
a special situation. If there is more than one, I'll
bet the number is statistcly insignificant.
 Also, you mention the word "Frumkiet" - that subject
is my favorite whipping boy, but that's another post.
> 
>
> > > There
> > > are very very few Lubavitchers who are in kollel
> > > after marriage (perhaps
> > > less than a hundred world-wide).  
> >
> >Perhaps this explains why there are no Gedolim in
> >Lubavitch today and why the Rebbe has no
> successors.
> >
> There are many gedolim and upcoming gedolim in
> Chabad today -- Rabbi Zalman 
> Posner is still around, Rabbi Nissen Mangel, Rabbi
> Manis Friedman, Rabbi 
> Shlomo Majeski, the 3 members of the Crown Heights
> Beis Din [regardless of 
> what one might think personally about Chabad
> politics), the list could go 
> on. 

Cmon, with all due respect: Manis Friedman, a Gadol?
Give me a break! I gues your definition of a gadol is
different than mine.

 The reason why the Rebbe has no successor is
> far more complex than just 
> the issue of whether capable candidates exist.


Your right. Experience has shown me that you don't
have to be a Gadol, to be a Rebbe.  Just go to any
basement Shtiebel in Boro Park and you will find a
Rebbe.

IMHO (or, for those who like the hebrew version, LAD)
A gadol has far greater importance to Judaism than
does a Rebbe.
 
> The reason Chabad isn't into producing long-term
> kollelniks is b/c unless 
> someone is of the caliber where they will teach at
> RCA, Tiferes Bachurim, 
> Hadar HaTorah, Beis Chana or Beis Rivka there are
> better uses for them 
> manpowerwise -- like yidden who never saw a
> lulav/esrog or tefillin in their 
> lives or observed a shabbos in their life.

The philosophic choice of whether to spend time in a
kollel that the Litvishe yeshivos make, or in Kiruv
that Chabad makes and is subject to debate amongst
sincere individuals.

HM

=====

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

Yitzchok Zirkind then wrote:



> 
> Just to correct myself the part I responded to was not written by R' Sam O.
> 



Erk. Sorry I jumped so quickly before. Thanks.


---sam

Mrs. GA writes:
<By the way-  how do people feel when they finish an evening's
entertainment
consisting of a movie or book which is far away from Torah hashkafah- 
then
it comes time to say Krias Shma al a mita.  Do people feel a
disturbing
dissonance-  and if not, why not?>

You seem to be implying an analogy between the tephillin date concept
and your situation of saying kris shma after, say, reading a book before
going to sleep.  I do not think this latter represents any kind of
dichotomy, certainly not one related to tephillin dates.
One can read Ayn Rand, who by all accounts propounds a non-Torahdik
philosophy, and come away with a strengthened understanding of why
personal achievement is not inconsistent with gemilus chasadim; one can
read DH Lawrence and come away with an understanding of how
dysfunctional relationships can arise and perpetuate, and use this to
improve the relationships in one's own life and your sensitivity to
mitzvos bein adam l'chaveiro.  [Certainly most of these outcomes could
be derived from appropriate Torah study itself but without being forced
to brood over the antitheses- and thoroughly refute them- you may not
appreciate and understand the Torah perspective as fully.]
This is in no way a dichotomy.  In any of your endeavors, however
secular they may appear, you should be striving to take away something
that will improve your Avodas HaShem.  Your kris shma will then be
enhanced; no dissonance here.  This can even apply to taking your kids
to see The Adventures of Elmo in Grouchland (if you dare).

I don't think the same outcome can be expected from a tephillin date.

I am not implying that everything has a hechsher as long as you have
the proper motives.  There are undoubtedly things which are sufficiently
removed from a Torah way of life- because of blatantly improper content,
a markedly slanted risk/benefit ratio etc.- but that doesn't seem to me
to be the question you were addressing.  The drawing of the line is, of
course, something which is hotly debated.


Respectfully, 

David Eisenman (my real name :) )

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


[ 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         ]