Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 162

Saturday, December 4 1999

• re: Brave New World or Retroactive Fatherhood
• Re: agunahs in baltimore
• Re[2]: Brave New World or Retroactive Fatherhood
• Problem kids
• Agunas in Baltimore
• Re: Homeless on Channuka
• Re: hamakom yenachem, singular vs. plural
• Re: agunahs in baltimore
• avodas Hashem & books
• Re: agunahs in baltimore
• Re: Agunos in Baltimore
• Re: Agunos in Baltimore
• Re: Agunos in Baltimore (and elsewhere)
• Hamakom yenachem, singular vs. plural
• Hamakom yinachem - for the non-religious?
• Hamakom yinachem - for the non-religious?
• Re: Problem kids - ADD
• Re: Problem Kids

Rabbi Eli Clark wrote <<< up to now the halakhah has always dealt with a
child who was conceived when the father was alive and born after the
father's passing.  In the case at hand, even conception takes place after
the death of the would-be father. >>>

Not necessarily. Halacha has long considered the sperm to be viable for
up to 3 days after relations. It is entirely possible that there might be
a Gemara or other early source somewhere, which discusses a case where a
man died shortly after having relations with his wife, and a child was
born 9 months and 2 days later. In such a case, the conception would
appear to have taken place after the father was dead and buried. It would
be a fascinatingly relevant source. Anyone have a Bar Ilan CD around?

Rabbi Clark also wrote: <<< If I recall correctly, the medical procedure
involves using an electrical shock to cause an ejaculation on the part of
the deceased.  With no intentional act of a living person, I do not think
there is a halakhic argument for paternity. >>>

Being alive might be a requirement for paternity, but why should
intention be required? See Bereshis 19:33,35. Lot was unaware of his
daughters' actions, yet he is considered the father of Amon and Moav, is
he not?

Akiva Miller
___________________________________________________________________
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.

On Thu, Dec 02, 1999 at 11:49:44AM -0500, Daniel B. Schwartz wrote:
> can you supply a link to the article?

http://www.jpost.com/Columns/Article-2.html


as for someone doubting that it was real --- obviously, we can't be sure
for a few days (when any letters to the editor would be printed),
but i can't believe that these particular women's statements could be 
either out of context or incorrect.  

in particular, the following facts seem indisputable.  

1.  these women are frum and they feel mistreated by their community.
2.  these women had to rely on tsedaka to meet expenses.
3.  these women had to go to civil court to meet expenses, where they
received verdicts which break down as follows: ....
4.  these women's communities are upset that they went to civil court,
despite #3, and at least one was put in cherem.
5.  neither has a get, even though their husbands have shown no interest
in staying married.  
6.  these women inadvertently made bad decisions, such as forfitting
ketubah money, after consultation with rabbis.  (note that i didn't say 
that the rabbi told them wrong, just that even after consultation with
rabbi, they took an action whose consequences they didn't know.)


any of these facts can be refuted, in that someone could write in and
say that the civil court's settlement was actually half what she claimed
it was, or the ex could write in and say that he'd given her a get or
that they had only separated.

and each fact, alone, is a terrible thing for each woman.


none of this is to say that this happens in every case, but it does seem
to have happened in two cases.

janet

FWIW the case of Yibum might be different . NO daas is required in the case of 
Yibum

Dislcaimer I don't know if what Lot did pre-Matan Torah was consistutes an OK 
YIBUM or not

Rich Wolpoe


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________

Being alive might be a requirement for paternity, but why should 
intention be required? See Bereshis 19:33,35. Lot was unaware of his 
daughters' actions, yet he is considered the father of Amon and Moav, is 
he not?

Akiva Miller
___________________________________________________________________ 
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.

The truth is there are probably no more or no fewer problem kids than there 
were in the past (lots of frum kids went off the derech 20-40 years ago as 
well -- not all of whom went to public schools).  This does not mean that 
there is nothing we can do to stop it.  As for the rising number of ADD kids 
it is due to two things: (a) increased TV watching -- albeit not in Jewish 
Observer-type families; and (b) the self-interest of pharmaceutical 
companies to define a problem to be remedied by one of their products.

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

http://www.jpost.com/Columns/Article-2.html
<<Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 11:49:44 -0500
> From: "Daniel B. Schwartz" <SCHWARTZESQ@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
> Subject: Re: agunahs in baltimore
> 
> can you supply a link to the article?>>

>>On the same topic, I am trying to figure out what the "Mishtatef 
B'Prutah" accomplishes for an Achsenai. If you hold it's chovas gavrah so 
why couldn't he be yotzei through shomei k'oneh (assuming that shomea 
k'oneh would work in this case). If it's chovas ahbayis-does the prutah 
give him a din as part of the bayis? A 3rd possibility is that it works 
like ner shabbos but then the question is how does it work by ner 
shabbos.>>

See Rav Hershel Schachter's article originally in Kavod HaRav and reprinted 
in Be'Ikvei Hatzon.

I've heard it suggested, clearly al pi drush, that the plural "eschem" is 
always used because Hashem is mourning along with the avel.

Daniel B. Schwartz, Esq. wrote:

>>The rule here in New York, is that husbands get protection from beth din 
and wives get it from the courts.>>

Easy there.  http://www.chafetzchaim.org

> > From: C1A1Brown@aol.com
> > Subject: Chassidus and TUM
> >
> > It strikes me as a bit paradoxical that you can say eating, drinking,
and
> > otherwise engaging in 'life' can be turned into a form of avodah under
the
> > rubric of Chassidus, but reading a good book cannot.  The distinction
> > being....?
> >
> > - -Chaim
> >
> > Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 15:40:05 -0500
> > From: "Feldman, Mark" <MFeldman@CM-P.COM>
> > Subject: RE: Re: Was Rambam and Asceticism, Now Chassidim,
> >
> > From: "Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer"
> > > You see, R' Lamm cannot determine, merely by his own
> > > pronouncement, that
> > > this is a Davar ha'Reshus that one should attempt to elevate.
> > > The Chassidc
> > > model is based on the assumption that there are certain cheftzas that
> > > possess nitzotzos of kedusha that can be elevated by use
> > > le'shem shomayim.
> > > The Chassidic model is not applied to certain processes nor
> > > to certain types
> > > of cheftzas (davar assur. assur, in Chassidus, means that the
> > > nitzotzos are
> > > too tied up - the translation of the Aramaic word assur - to
> > > be elevated in
> > > our world. pig is an example). R' Lamm needs to prove, to use
> > > the Chassidic
> > > model, that the model applies here. I do not believe he ever did.
> >
> > I'm no expert on these matters, but didn't Rav Kook believe that one can
> > elevate secular studies?
> >
> > In other words, the fact that Chassidim--who for other reasons may have
been
> > against involvement in the secular world--did not give any hint as to
the
> > application of the model to secular studies should not bias us against
> > applying the model.  Secular study, which is in essence the study of
> > Hashem's creation (certainly in the case of the "hard sciences"; in the
case
> > of humanities, it is the study of Hashem's creations' creation), is
> > undoubtedly different from pig, and the fact that its value has been
> > affirmed by Greats from the Vilna Gaon to Rav Kook should give us a
certain
> > measure of confidence that the Chassidic model should be applicable.

As I understand it, avodas Hashem requires birur in most cases.  When we
eat, in a sense our body does this birur for us-  we make the appropriate
blessings, redeem those sparks,  eat in order to do avodas Hashem... the
body expels the waste. This is true for many kinds of malacha and physical
avoda.
When it comes to reading a book,  the avodah is not so pashut.
The sciences can certainly be read in order to give us tools for avodas
Hashem. The study itself is not the avoda but the preparation for the avoda.
We're not doing any birur at this stage.  Learning pure Torah is an avoda.
(btw it's pertinent that we are permitted to read literature on science and
nature on Shabbos.)

<warning, amateur psychologist thinking>   We know that thoughts are so much
more subtle than physical objects.  Birur is therefore much more subtle and
difficult.  In many cases we CANNOT expel the garbage,  partly because of
the amazing faculty of the human brain to file away pretty much anything you
put into it, from commercial jingles to vivid images from T2.  If you read,
let's say, a Steven King novel,  you may find something of worth in there
which you can actually use in your life, but you're also likely to be stuck
with a lot of really strong visualisations that you'll probably remember for
the rest of your life. Even if you claim that it's not possible to "metamei"
the mind- (arguable)- where's the berur? Where's the avoda? <spoilsport mode
off>  Mrs. G. Atwood.

If you intend to caution me about lashon hara, I accept the admonition with
gratitude.  But, without such frank and open dialogue, the problem will
never be solved.

DANIEL B. SCHWARTZ, ESQ. SPECIALIZING IN ALL ASPECTS
OF MATRIMONIAL, FAMILY AND COMMERCIAL LITIGATION FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION INQUIRE AT:
SCHWARTZESQ@WORLDNET.ATT.NET
----- Original Message -----
From: <gil.student@citicorp.com>
To: <avodah@aishdas.org>; <SCHWARTZESQ@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Sent: Thursday, December 02, 1999 5:24 PM
Subject: Re: agunahs in baltimore


> Daniel B. Schwartz, Esq. wrote:
>
> >>The rule here in New York, is that husbands get protection from beth din
> and wives get it from the courts.>>
>
> Easy there.  http://www.chafetzchaim.org
>
>

I have a close friend whose mother b"h was freed just last week after being
an agunah for over 14 years. (BTW, "agunah" is like "ba'al teshuvah" as
we've taken the word and applied it to a new and somewhat different situation.)

He was surprised by a rav who told him not to speak in public on the subject;
to make a kiddush, but not announce the particular event generating that
feeling of hoda'ah to HKBH. The reason given was that it was too close to
lashon hara. And he too wonders how we're supposed to address the problem
if everyone is afraid to publicize it because of LH issues.

In terms of common knowledge, his father's passport was confiscated by the
State of Israel. The event was covered globally by the Jewish media, as well
as by the NY Times, the Philadelphia Inquirer, the Boston Herald, vechulu.

I have to repeat Russel Hendell's request to actually discuss the parameters
of LH. It would seem that erring in either direction in this circumstance
would be a MAJOR avlah.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for  2-Dec-99: Chamishi, Vayeshev
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 77b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         

Not to toot my own horn but I was present at that GET and had a miniscule
role in the process of attaining it.  In light of the whole aguna gestalt, I
have no choice but to seriously question the motovations of the rav who
advised the son not to publicise it.
DANIEL B. SCHWARTZ, ESQ. SPECIALIZING IN ALL ASPECTS
OF MATRIMONIAL, FAMILY AND COMMERCIAL LITIGATION FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION INQUIRE AT:
SCHWARTZESQ@WORLDNET.ATT.NET
----- Original Message -----
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
To: Avodah Torah Discussion Group <avodah@aishdas.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 02, 1999 6:39 PM
Subject: Re: Agunos in Baltimore


> I have a close friend whose mother b"h was freed just last week after
being
> an agunah for over 14 years. (BTW, "agunah" is like "ba'al teshuvah" as
> we've taken the word and applied it to a new and somewhat different
situation.)

Daniel, as we're talking about a Rav whose helped a number of agunos, your
judgement shouldn't be that hastily applied.

-mi

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

michael feldstein @aol.com  wrote:
Subject: Hamakom yenachem, singular vs. plural

>>>I've heard people say the prayer of "hamakom" at a house of shiva to one
>>>person in the singular..."hamakom yenachem oscha" .  i've also heard others say
>>>it in the plural to one person, "hamakom yenachem eschem".   is there a
>>>preferred way to say this to one individual?

The Nitei Gavriel on Avelus brings both Minhogim.

>>>what is the original source of  this sentence?

Prishah 393:3

Good Shabbos and Lechtigen Chanukah

SBA

1. I've had the dilemma of what to say when leaving a nichum aveilim of a
not frum and not Jewishly educated aveil.

To say "Hamakom yinachem" is often not understood and perhaps thereby does
not serve its purpose of nichum.

Do we say it anyway or should one use a different "nusach"
????


2.I've also had the problem,even more of a problem, when writing a short
note or telegram, of nichum to someone whom I cannot visit who is not
"educated"

There is no possibility of explaining etc - you can only write one or two
sentences. What to write???

s'nizka... b'karov... v'lo nada od zarot

reuven

1. I've had the dilemma of what to say when leaving a nichum aveilim of a
not frum and not Jewishly educated aveil.

To say "Hamakom yinachem" is often not understood and perhaps thereby does
not serve its purpose of nichum.

Do we say it anyway or should one use a different "nusach"
????


2.I've also had the problem,even more of a problem, when writing a short
note or telegram, of nichum to someone whom I cannot visit who is not
"educated"

There is no possibility of explaining etc - you can only write one or two
sentences. What to write???

s'nizka... b'karov... v'lo nada od zarot

reuven

I read a number of articles and books on ADD/ADHD.  Europeans consider Americans
as over-diagnosing ADD/ADHD based upon statistical standards, etc

The defense/rationale was: look at the gene pool! America was settled by 
restless souls who had the get up and go to leave Europe for a better life in 
America and eshewed safety and stability in fvaor of risk taking.  We are 
descendant from fronteirsmen!

FWIW my grandfather left Bialystock circa 1890 following a  pogrom that killed 
one of his brothers.  The Mishpocho was flabbergasted that he didn;t stya in teh
family business.  he reorted" Poland/Russia was not a safe palce for jews and he
left"

The others passively waited forthe pogroms to subside and reamined in Europe and
proabably all perished in the holocost.

It was the impatient/impulsive ones - by and large - who would not tolerate the 
czarist opperssion, etc.

I think that Europeans who remained settled in the Old wolrd are more settled  
types of people and Americans are more get-up-and-go types of people.  The gene 
pool was selected by the feet of the respective anscestors.

Gutn Hannukah
Rich Wolpoe





______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Problem kids 
Author:  <avodah@aishdas.org> at tcpgate
Date:    12/2/1999 5:01 PM


The truth is there are probably no more or no fewer problem kids than there 
were in the past (lots of frum kids went off the derech 20-40 years ago as 
well -- not all of whom went to public schools).  This does not mean that 
there is nothing we can do to stop it.  As for the rising number of ADD kids 
it is due to two things: (a) increased TV watching -- albeit not in Jewish 
Observer-type families; and (b) the self-interest of pharmaceutical 
companies to define a problem to be remedied by one of their products.

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

I'm responding to a few posts on the topic of Problem kids:

a)

>Jewish kids on the verge of religious rebellion generally aren't going to
>straighten out because of parental "pressure"
<snip>.
>David Finch

My husband and I have travelled throughout Israel over the past 18 years and
we have visited many of the highschool yeshivot and Ulpanot belonging to
various groups.

There is one common theme that we have seen:  A lack of knowledge.

I'm not talking about Parshat Shavu'a or how many Blatt of G'mara a kid
knows.  I'm talking about the basic jewish philosophy that guides are lives.
Rav Chaim David Ha'Levy ZT"L in his introduction to his Makor Chayim (the
full not the abridged) notes that Rav Kook and others have commented on the
difference of our generation that b/c of many reasons (see the original
articles) needs what we call Agada or Midrash to round out their ability to
follow in the path of Torah.

From discussions with relatives in non-Bnei Akiva institutes, no such
changes have been made in their curriculum, and indeed many of the students
cope without it.  The "problem" ones are many times those who would have
benefited from an education that included discussions such as "Did Hashem
give the Torah" etc., allowing them to express themselves and get the
answers that are available.  Instead they are told to shut up.   A secondary
issue is that many times we have seen teenagers who if they had been allowed
to go to Bnei Akiva Yeshivot would  have found what their souls seek, but
since these Yeshivot are not "good enough" for many Chareidi parents these
kids drop out.

Nowadays there are some programs ex-highschool where kids who couldn't make
it in the Chareidi system are learning in Yishuvim in Yehuda & Shomrom with
great success.

The reason I started  with the issue of knowledge is that this problem
exists also in the Bnei Akiva system, even though it's curriculum does
include relevant topics, either b/c some rabbis aren't comfortable with
discussions such as these and skip them, so unless an outside lecturer
raises them they won't hear them, or b/c they have other problems which
impacted and somehow they succeeded in learning 4 years of highschool
without learning anything.
(cont. below)

b)
=============

[del]
>We seem basically to agree with each other. There must be a fine line
indeed
>between "nagging" and "demanding"; frankly, I'm not sure I see the
>distinction. Pushing a kid to study hard (and build up a superficially
>well-rounded high-school resume) to get into Harvard might involve all
sorts
>of coercion that you and I would both call "pressure." Is it beneficial
>pressure? Maybe that depends on the kid. You're absolutely right to point
out
>the importance of whether such pressure reflects parental expectations
>instead of an effort to understand kids as individuals. (As a survivor of
the
>Ivy League, I think the whole get-into-a-good-school thing is a lot of
>hoo-hah.)
> More to the point: Generations of
>Ashkenazim learned Torah the hard way, crowding around a single volume of
>Talmud, studying 18 hours a day, sometimes under the supervision of
>exceedingly tough-minded Gedolim whose Holy perfectionism far exceeded
>anything that would be tolerated in modern society, including the Marine
>Corps.
>
>Put it this way: In learning Torah, our forefathers understood that it was
>not enough to be smart, or sensitive, or well-meaning. There was, and is,
far
>too much a stake. To keep the Torah, we need to be strong in a variety of
>ways that a hard-nosed instructor at Julliard (or at Parris Island) would
>understand. (Personally, I'm not there, but with HaShem's help I aspire to
>it.)
>
>Back to the original point, I think there is a subtle sort of dialectic
>between "hardness" and "softness" in the character of children that needs
to
>be explored before trying to figure out a solution to a problem child's
>dilemma.
>
>David Finch

Another problem I've seen is that we tend to think in theories.  If theory A
worked for child A why shouldn't it work for child B?  Our school systems
also work this way.  There is no time or energy to deal with each child
according to their special needs.  Remember the G'mara about the kid who
needed information repeated 400 times (IIRC)?  Imagine such a child today!!!
Unless the parents take an active hand, the child will fail not b/c he/she
can't learn, but b/c the system isn't geared to cope with them.

Having a central school is obviously better than not having any school, but
they do tend to work in "mass production" methods.   One of the things that
the internet and computers have changed is the ability to begin paying
attention to individual needs.   In many schools, and many parents are
finally using the computer as an aid, but once again -- it's still in a
"mass media" version and not enough is done about teaching in various
methods to answer to the variety of children's special needs.

Take Na"ch.  This is a very visual text.  Imagine teaching any of the famous
Nevu'ot using the computer to supply imagery.  Many children would probably
remember and understand the Nevi'im much better than just by relying on
their own imagination and the Parshanim.  I could go on, but this post is
long enough.

Shoshana L. Boublil, Israel

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


[ 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         ]