Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 176

Sunday, December 12 1999

• Re: Avodah V4 #173
• Re: Avodah V4 #159
• Re: Avodah V4 #160
• Re: Avodah V4 #174
• AGUNOHT--Another approach
• Abortion
• Silent vs Aspirated HAY in middle of Word
• CHIZKUNI on Gen 32:5
• Re: Avodah V4 #173
• aguna issues- last words.
• Re: prenups, lawyers, and Bach
• Re: AGUNOHT--Another approach
• Re: Abortion
• Heter Mechira (was Re: cynicism, agunot, solving the problem...)
• Re: poverty
• Re: prenups, lawyers, and Bach
• Bach again, with citations
• pshat and kiddush

In a message dated 12/10/1999 12:03:21 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
owner-fbb6@columbia.edu writes

<< At this particular point in the discussion I'm most exasperated with those
 folks who cannot see that something needs to be fixed and retreat into
 pious platitudes and assuming other people aren't frum enough because they
 don't accept the inevitablity of oppression in a system which is supposed
 to be just. >>

There have been a couple of posts complaining about the fact that the Avodah 
list has been occupied with the discussion of 'political' issues rather than 
techniques to improve personal and communal Avodas Hashem.  I think that if 
we were to view this discussion as being the search for an appropriate 
response to a situation where halacha (or halachists) can cause tza'ar, then 
it fits with at least my understanding of the purpose of the list.  (Standard 
disclaimer of lack of ba'alus goes here.)

I do find it frustrating to be accused of being exasperating and of making 
assumptions about people whom I have never met.  I think that everyone agrees 
that there is a significant Agunah problem.  The solution proposed by Rabbi 
Rackman has clearly not met with widespread halachic approval.  That being 
the case, we can respond in several ways:

We can accuse those that disagree with Rabbi Rackman of being inconsiderate 
pietistic chauvinists.  This is neither fair, nor helpful, to any of the 
parties involved.

We can attempt to derive other halachic solutions.  This is certainly beyond 
my own  capabilities, but it seems like an idea worthy of support and 
promotion among thye more learned.

We can attempt to provide whatever support and/or pressure that we can to 
help women in this situation.  I think that just about everyone I know would 
be happy to help in this regard, and certainly I would welcome suggestions 
for accomplishing this on a practical level.

Last point:  Mention has been made several times of how the halachic system 
could not possibly countenance the extent of grief that occurs when husbands 
withhold gittin.  From a philosophical standpoint, I do not understand this 
argument.  I have heard a similar point made with regard to egalitarian 
minyanim as well as homosexuality, where, to my mind, the halacha is clearly 
absolute.  I am not stating that there is no solution to the Agunah problem, 
I am simply stating that the possibility exists that there is no simple 
annulment-type solution.  If this is incorrect thinking, I would appreciate 
being corrected rather than just insulted.

Thanks,

Meyer

Heartfelt thanks for your concern and kind words of condolence.
		The Frimers

Heartfelt thanks for your concern, prayers and kind words of condolence.
		The Frimers

regrding the non-working types - i was speaking of the
reality of the situation.  I was not getting into any
halachic questions of work vs learning vs living off
zedakah.

re the poskim - the report gave r. elyashiv and r.
shach as the source of the psok.

                                  
>
> 
> Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 13:13:32 -0500
> From: Kenneth G Miller <kennethgmiller@juno.com>
> Subject: re: poverty
> 
> Ben Waxman wrote: <<< within that distance i counted
> 13 people asking for
> money. ... granted there is higher unemployment in
> israel than there was
> a few years ago.  but many of these people aren't
> the working type
> anyway.  Old folks, kollel guys. >>>
> 
> I don't see the connection between "aren't the
> working type" and "kollel
> guys". Is asking for money on the street a greater
> kiyyum of Talmud Torah
> than being a "working type"?
> 
> 
> I was encouraged by his report that <<< on the radio
> this morning it was
> reported that the moetzet hagadolim has poskened
> that weddings must be
> limited in size and cost per person - 250 guests max
> and no more than 10
> dollars per person. >>>
> 
> Just wondering --- Which "moetzet hagadolim" was
> this? Agudah, Shas, or
> some other?
> 
> 
> Good Shabbos and Chodesh Tov to all,
> 
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Thousands of Stores.  Millions of Products.  All in one place.
Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com

About a year ago I wrote a 4 part series on Agunah in the email 
list Chevruta. (Part 1 contained names of orginazations that 
help with agunoth). Part 2 advocated treating Agunoth by pRAYER
vs Halacha.

Judaism has about a half dozen components---halachah, prayer, prphecy,
kehuna, the king, etc. Too often we rely on halachah as a means of
solving our problems. 

There are explicit laws that people undergoing great anguish have the
right to pray (for the death of their tormenters) and be answered. The
Bible is explicit on this. (By widows/orphans in Mishpatim and by
workers in RAYH/KI TAYSAY (see Rashi)). 

I would advocate a
---public policy of encouraging agunoth to pray for the death of their
tormentors
---public policy of publicizing all such men who die from such prayers.

(I can reprint that posting if desired---one person on this list asked me
for
it a while back and I still have not gotten around to answering it)

Russell Hendel; Phd ASA; http://www.shamash.org/rashi/
___________________________________________________________________
Why pay more to get Web access?
Try Juno for FREE -- then it's just $9.95/month if you act NOW!
Get your free software today: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.

Just to "clarify" a recent posting about Abortion. Abortion 
involves 4 possible prohibitions in Jewish law
---murder
---bodily damage
---monetary damage
---monetary damage to husband.

It is certainly true that not all cases of abortion are classified
as murder (eg before 40 days---this would be true for a noachide
also). Nevertheless according to many authorities abortion is classified
as murder after 40 days. 

However the status of life of the fetus is inferior to full fledged
people
Hence
---the mothers life would take precedence over the fetus
---hence there is no capital penalty on abortion
But the violation of DON"T KILL is still there.

An excellent CLARIFICATION of the above comes from Rambam
Murder Chapter 2. The central theme of this perek is that there are
many killings which are classified as murder EVEN THOUGH THERE
IS NO DEATH PENALTY. Each of the cases without capital punishment
in chapter 2 come under "God will seek his blood" because there is
a violation of murder.

Russell Hendel; http://www.shamash.org/rashi/
___________________________________________________________________
Why pay more to get Web access?
Try Juno for FREE -- then it's just $9.95/month if you act NOW!
Get your free software today: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.

I promised Rabbi Teitz (and 1 or 2 others) to dig up my
source for the concept that all HAYS are silent in the
middle of a word

The book is TzoHar HaTayvah HaChadash by the same author
as the BAAL BINYAN SHLOMO

At the beginning of the book he discusses MOVING and RESTING
AHVY letters. He defines a RESTING/CONCEALED letter as a letter 
that is not pronounced (Even though it is written)
	>but the HAY is never RESTING/CONCEALED in
	>the middle of a word (Paragraphs 3,4,6 Beginning of book)
(In a footnote he suggests that the reason there is no concealment is
because it would in effect break up the word into two parts).

If my understanding of this is correct (and if the book is correct) then
both I and Rabbi Teitz were incorrect.

I was incorrect since I stated that all HAYS are concealed when the
opposite is the case...all HAYS are aspirated.

Rabbi Teitz was incorrect since he distinguished between HAYS with
a SHVA under them and HAYS without a SHVA. (In passing Rabbi
Teitz has strong arguments and appears to be correct. Does anyone
know of a source (among rishonim) that would settle this (In passing
I note that sometimes SHVAS are pronounced even though they are
not written (eg the terminal shva at the end of a word).

Russell Hendel; http://www.shamash.org/rashi/
___________________________________________________________________
Why pay more to get Web access?
Try Juno for FREE -- then it's just $9.95/month if you act NOW!
Get your free software today: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.

A few weeks  ago I cited my often cited quote from the Rav 
on Gen 32:5 that the Rashi on I LIVED WITH LABAN
	>RASHI: I observed the TARYAG mitzvoth
	>(TARYAG = GARTI in gematria)
should not be taken literally. The real connection between
	>I LIVED WITH LAVAN (GARTI)
and
	>I OBSERVED TARYAG MITZVOTH
is that the words for residing in Hebrew are
	>GARTI (TEMPORARY RESIDENCE)
vs
	>YSHAVTI (PERMANAT RESIDENCE)
Since Yaakov used the word GARTI vs YASHAVTI it
shows he felt uncomfortable presumably because he 
observed Mitzvoth.

I then mentioned that Rav Chaiim Soloveitchick pointed
out that this idea was in a Chizkuni

Rabbi Bechoffer responded
	>The Chizkuni says no such thing

I finally got around to looking up the Chizkuni. He actually
says
	>(The real derivation is) because it could have said
	>I have TARRIED (AYCHARTI) vs GARTI

In other words Rav Chaiim was correct that the Chizkuni 
was the first to advance that the Gematria should not be
taken literally. The Rav went one step further and refined
the Chizkuni's AYCHARTI-GARTI distinction with a 
GARTI-YASHAVTI distinction. (Such step wise advances
in research are normal).

(In passing..I would suggest that when people say things
they should cite the relevant passage if it is only 1-2 lines...
Rabbi Bechoffer could have accomplished alot more if
he cited the actual Chizkuni...as I just showed the actual
Chizkuni can be VIEWED in several ways some of which
agree with the Rav and Rab Chaiim. In general very often
on this list people cite things and could easily add a line
or two with either a summary or a citation).

Russell Hendel; http://www.shamash.org/rashi/
___________________________________________________________________
Why pay more to get Web access?
Try Juno for FREE -- then it's just $9.95/month if you act NOW!
Get your free software today: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.

In a message dated 12/11/99 10:11:17 PM US Central Standard Time, 
Broasters@aol.com writes:

<< Mention has been made several times of how the halachic system 
 could not possibly countenance the extent of grief that occurs when husbands 
 withhold gittin.  From a philosophical standpoint, I do not understand this 
 argument.  I have heard a similar point made with regard to egalitarian 
 minyanim as well as homosexuality, where, to my mind, the halacha is clearly 
 absolute.   >>

There a big differences between withholding a gittin, on the one hand, and 
espousing
egalitarian minyanim and homosexuality, on the other.

No one gets hurt if women have to pray in the back of the shul. No lives are 
destroyed, no children suffer and learn to hate. As of homosexuality, well, 
from what I can tell observant Jews follow the rule of "Don't Ask, Don't 
Tell." A predictable percentage of observant Jews are clearly, and for all I 
know actively, homosexual. They don't (or can't) hide it, and they don't ask 
anyone else to abide it. They are allowed to live their lives in peace, 
halacha notwithstanding. (Maybe halacha allows this. It's a complicated 
point.) 

Withholding a gittin, however, is an act of personal destruction. Whether the 
halachic system countenances the grief that comes with this destruction is 
not exactly a "philosophical" question. (Since when does the halachic system 
countenance philosophy at all, at least in this sense?) It is a question of 
faith and revelation. In Talmudic times, grief was pretty common -- people 
routinely got sick and died, infant mortality was high, living conditions 
were rough, and only the Gedolim lived past forty-five. We are past most of 
that now. Halacha, or at least some halacha, is not.

David Finch

Shalom & Shavua tov to Avodah members.

Sorry, I'm guilty of horrible word choice.  I should not have said that I
would criticize a "stubborn" rabbi but rather an apathetic rabbi. (however
unusual)  If he can't take care of the issue, then he has to find someone
who is more qualified to tackle it.

Secondly-  The aguna tragedies usually need to be dealt with on an
individual case basis- and this is certainly happening.  Halvai that Rabbi
Rackman's solution could be halachically valid! Liking the idea doesn't
necessarily make it so.  I agree that poskim who understand these inyanim
well should continue the search for a blanket solution for such problems.
This does not necessarily require an institute-  sufficient individual
rabbinical brainstorming and effort could do the trick.

Oh yes,  all due respects to M. Berger, but surely societal issues are an
essential part of our avodas Hashem as a clal?  I admit I'm nowhere near as
hot in the mareh mekoros department as many members of this list, but I
think we have ample evidence of my assertion in Pirkei Avos & other well
known places.   Given that- can we please leave this thread- (if that has
not already been proposed) ?- it seems that the sensitivities of many
members are getting hurt.  No hard feelings, anyone.   Mrs. G. Atwood.






===================================================
Mrs. Gila Atwood
We are pixels in G-d's imagination.
You are welcome to browse my website at:
http://www.bereshitsoftware.com/gila/main.html
a little Torah, nature, humour, environmental concerns and memoirs.

On 10 Dec 99, at 12:40, David Riceman wrote:

> RYGB wrote:
> <<
> No one picked up on my message of yesterday. Perhaps folks understood it
> as
> a protest against R' Rackman's BD, but it realy wasn't. It is a serious
> question re lawyering, and many other professions.
> >>
> Actually lawyering has many more halachic problems than other
> professions, though I believe R. Broyde published an article permitting
> it.  Ignoring those, my instinct is to permit it because other lawyers
> are available.  

There was an article about this in the third issue of the Journal of 
Halacha and Contemporary Society (Vol. II No.1). 

Non-lawyers tend to think of all lawyering as litigation (going to 
court), but actually there are probably more of us that don't go to 
court (ever) than those that do. Personally, avoiding the halachic 
issues of going to court (especially in Eretz Yisrael) was one of the 
reasons I never went into litigation in the first place.

-- Carl


Carl M. Sherer, Adv.
Silber, Schottenfels, Gerber & Sherer
Telephone 972-2-625-7751
Fax 972-2-625-0461
mailto:cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il
mailto:sherer@actcom.co.il

Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for my son,
Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.
Thank you very much.

On 12 Dec 99, at 10:35, Russell J Hendel wrote:

> I would advocate a
> ---public policy of encouraging agunoth to pray for the death of their
> tormentors

One is not supposed to pray for tzaros to befall his/her tormentors 
because doing so encourages a closer examination of his own 
actions. Therefore, while this might be appealing, I would say yotzo 
schoro b'hefseido.

-- Carl


Carl M. Sherer, Adv.
Silber, Schottenfels, Gerber & Sherer
Telephone 972-2-625-7751
Fax 972-2-625-0461
mailto:cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il
mailto:sherer@actcom.co.il

Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for my son,
Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.
Thank you very much.

On 12 Dec 99, at 10:30, Russell J Hendel wrote:

> However the status of life of the fetus is inferior to full fledged
> people
> Hence
> ---the mothers life would take precedence over the fetus

I don't think it's correct to say that the fetus is "inferior" to a full 
fledged person. Rather, if the mother's life is in danger R"L, the 
fetus has the din of rodef and therefore one can abort the fetus to 
save the mother's life.

-- Carl


Carl M. Sherer, Adv.
Silber, Schottenfels, Gerber & Sherer
Telephone 972-2-625-7751
Fax 972-2-625-0461
mailto:cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il
mailto:sherer@actcom.co.il

Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for my son,
Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.
Thank you very much.

On 9 Dec 99, at 17:42, Daniel B. Schwartz wrote:

> > The Heter Mechira is a major problem, with large sections of the
> > Mizrachi/NRP not holding by it (It goes without saying that the
> > Yeshiva/Chassidic world doesn't hold by it).
> 
>     And the Heter Iskah?  Also, please note that no one as far as I know
> decries the Heter Mechira as being marbeh ovrei aveirah as the Rackman bet
> din has been.  

Whoever said you obviously have never been in Israel during 
Shmitta was correct.

The Charedi yeshiva velt with virtual unanimity is not somech on 
the heter, and most of the dati leumi yeshivas are not somech on it 
either.

Shortly before the last Shmitta, my wife heard a prominent dati 
leumi Rav say that the country still needs the heter (because of 
exports), but individuals do not, and should not rely on it.

I doubt Rav Kook zt"l himself would rely on the heter today. 

And that's without even considering that no serious consideration 
has ever been made of whether the heter is still a necessity (as 
Rav Kook set out in the original heter) and without considering that 
the legal formality of registering the sale of the land in the tabu 
(local equivalent of the Registry of Deeds) was not even done until 
the last two or three shmittos.

-- Carl


Carl M. Sherer, Adv.
Silber, Schottenfels, Gerber & Sherer
Telephone 972-2-625-7751
Fax 972-2-625-0461
mailto:cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il
mailto:sherer@actcom.co.il

Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for my son,
Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.
Thank you very much.

On 10 Dec 99, at 1:53, ben waxman wrote:

> an observation that i made this morning:
> 
> i walked from kikkar shabbat to the brooklyn bakery, a
> distance of 100 yards give or take.  within that
> distance i counted 13 people asking for money.
> 
> i have been walking this route for 15 years.  it seems
> to me that there are more and more people asking for
> money.  

Actually, I don't think those numbers are any different than they 
were when I came on aliya eight years ago, nor are they any 
different than when I was a bochur here twenty years ago.

granted there is higer unemployment in israe
> than there was a few years ago.  

Actually, many of the unemployed are immigrants from third world 
countries and the FSU who are either uneducated, or not up to 
date in their fields. Among western olim and native Israelis the 
unemployment rate is actually much lower, but you are unlikely to 
find that statistic in most press reports.

but many of theese
> people aren't the working type anyway.  Old folks,
> kollel guys.

On Malchei Yisrael, I think you see more old folks than anything 
else.

> are the tzedakah funds drying up?  is there too much
> demand and not enough donations?

I don't think the tzedaka funds are drying up. I think there are more 
aniyim than there were twenty years ago, but I don't think you're 
seeing them on Malchei Yisrael. OTOH, if you go and check 
gmach statistics, you will find that there are a lot of young people 
here living in a depth of poverty that is unheard of in the US and 
other western countries. IMHO all of this means that you should be 
diligent in seeking out Gabbaei Tzedaka who will make sure your 
money goes to people who really need it. Suffice it to say, that I do 
not give large donations to people in the streets....

> a tangent: on the radio this morning it was reported
> that the moetzet hagadolim has poskened that weddings
> must be limited in size and cost per person - 250
> guests max and no more than 10 dollars per person.

I don't know what that psak means or to whom it applies. It 
certainly hasn't been given a whole lot of publicity - I didn't even see 
it on street posters (and in my neighborhood one would expect to 
see something like that). And it doesn't solve the problem of 
families where the chosson expects to receive an apartment paid 
for by his inlaws. 

-- Carl


Carl M. Sherer, Adv.
Silber, Schottenfels, Gerber & Sherer
Telephone 972-2-625-7751
Fax 972-2-625-0461
mailto:cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il
mailto:sherer@actcom.co.il

Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for my son,
Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.
Thank you very much.

In a message dated 12/12/99 12:07:20 PM US Central Standard Time, 
cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il writes:

<< Non-lawyers tend to think of all lawyering as litigation (going to 
 court), but actually there are probably more of us that don't go to 
 court (ever) than those that do. Personally, avoiding the halachic 
 issues of going to court (especially in Eretz Yisrael) was one of the 
 reasons I never went into litigation in the first place.
  >>

I know nothing of the official ethical rules for Israeli lawyers. Most 
American states, however, have adopted variations of the American Bar 
Association's Model Code of Professional Conduct. The ABA Code draws little 
meaningful distinction between advocating -- "zealously" advocating, as the 
rule goes -- positions for clients in court and out of court. Arguing before 
a judge or jury is no different from sitting behind a desk in negotiations 
with other lawyers, in drafting contracts, in rendering advice on legal 
options available to surmount the client's dilemma. 

In short, almost all lawyers have to deal with more or less the same set of 
halachic issues in advocating client-based positions. This is true, I think, 
even when all parties to a conflict are observant Jews who wish, or pretend 
to wish, to reach results that are halachically correct. This is a product of 
the adversary system, which grew out of the English common law and exists in 
Israel as well as the U.S.

Last year I studied in a shiur led by RYGB on Makkos. In Makkos, the Talmudic 
approach to many (if certainly not all) criminal litigation issues is 
remarkably similar to that followed in American courts. This approach tacitly 
recognizes the dilemmas the Beis Din must face in attempting to give a 
criminal or personal-injury defendant an even break. Makkos' answers are 
quite pragmatic and down-to-earth. This is good news for ethically sensitive 
modern Jewish lawyers.

David Finch

Jordan Hirsch wrote:

<<

Yes, I think that his [JS Bach's] music is divinely inspired, and
second, Theory and 
counterpoint as practiced by Bach is certainly of an intellectual level
to 
require divine assistance. Besides, there is something beyond the
execution 
of species counterpoint at play in the music of Bach, and that is
Genius, 
which certainly is some kind of divine gift.

But you're missing my point. I was merely trying to wax poetic about my
love 
for his music, and my regard for his unique genius. We spend so much
time 
trying to say lomdus, that we forget that sometimes things said on this
list 
do not require textual or halachik analysis. Unfortunately, some of the 
people on this list who need to hear this most delete my postings, so
they 
are doomed to live in their litvish ghetto...
 let me just remind everybody, 
(tongue in cheek, of course) that lomdus is just a tool.

>>

  You missed my point as well.  I was enquiring whether aesthetics can
be the content of Divine inspiration.  That you chose that metaphor,
however facetiously, implies that you think so.  There is a Rashi which
appears only in some editions of the text (which is why I can never find
it when I want it - it's somewhere in the parshioth of m'lecheth
hamishkan - I believe the version Rabbi Hartman printed with his edition
of Gur Aryeh) which implies that aesthetics can be.
  My own prejudice is that it depends on the ancient and honorable
machloketh about the relative priority of sechel and dimyon in avodath
hashem.  See H. Yesodei HaTorah 7:1, Sefer HaMaspik L'Ovdei HaShem
4:2:11 (pp.141-143 in Rosenblatt's translation), the first introduction
to Gevuroth HaShem, Shaarei Kedushah 3:5, Hayei Olam HaBa pp. 48-49 (ed.
Barzani).  There are some juicy citations from Shaarei Orah, but I lent
my copy to a friend.
  You've guessed that I think the sechelniks would say no and the
dimyonniks would say yes.  The particular problem is that an analogous
dispute exists in music (see Shaw's essay on Grove, reprinted in the
Oxford book of essays) and I would put Bach squarely among the
sechelniks.

David Riceman

1.  See Yoma 14a Tosafoth s.v. "Mai Mazeh? Noseh" - they imply that even
chazal need a proof to read a scriptural passage non-literally.

2.  I have heard (I don't know how accurately) that it is illegal in all
fifty states to give alcohol to minors.
i.  Is this true?
ii. Do the law abiding Americans on this list restrict their children to
grape juice at kiddush?

David Riceman

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


[ 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         ]