Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 246

Monday, January 3 2000

• perogatives of a king
• Moshe Rabbeinu's Free Will
• Baruch Goldstein et al.
• Dessler and the yeshiva system.
• Re: Avodah V4 #245
• Re: sefardi minhag
• Re: Women and "mayim achronim"
• Re: Altalena
• Re: sefardi minhag
• Re: sefardi minhag
• Boys will be boys (Was: Rav Dessler's shita on kollel)
• Re: Moshe Rabbeinu's Free Will
• Re: YU is a Litvishe yeshiva in the mold of Volozhin (?) Curious objections(?)
• Baseball halochoh
• Intrinsic value, kashrus vs arlah
• Re: Baseball halochoh
• RE: Avodah V4 #245
• Halachah and Baseball
• Re: YU is a Litvishe yeshiva in the mold of Volozhin (?) Curious objections(?)

> 
> > > 
> > > A Jewish king does not have to justify any expenditure.
> > > 
> > I am not convinced of this.
> > He certainly has the right to spend on his household and on an army
> > and to build roads.
> > I would doubt that he can distribute money freely to his friends.
> > What are legitimate needs can be discussed but I again assume they
> > have to be rationale.
> 
> See Hilchos Melochim Perek 4.
> 

Rambam there says that a king can spend money on battles and for
his own and his servants needs.
There is nothing there about a king's right for "civil rule",
i.e. can a king spend money on public parks?
There is certainly nothing i saw that says a king can give money
to whomever he feels like it.

Eli Turkel

> Moshe's anava & work of spiritual refinement led him to be zocheh to a
> degree of yedias Hashem which enabled him to see through  a clear
> aspaklaria.

Re Micha Berger's post-  I'm not sure what you mean by your identification
of two levels as one.
Please enlighten me. Perhaps the following will clarify my understanding.

To continue.
Moshe Rabeinu's  isorusa deletata-  his arousal from below  was his constant
mida refinement and anava.
This resulted in an isorusa dele'ela-  arousal from above-  a nevuah of
exceptionally clear quality-  as if G-d dictated word for word, and Moshe in
his clarity could record and trasmit faithfully. Here he didn't have bechira
because the transmission was so perfect.  This is through the aspaqlaria
hameira.  Here there was no shaila of bechira.
However, Moshe Rabeinu achieved 49th sha'arei bina-  the 50th could not be
achieved while he lived.  (thus Yehoshua was called "bin Nun"- son of 50
after MR's petira)  So there is an aspaqlaria, however transparent,  and
therefore MR had aspect of "yesh" however subtle. We see that even in the
mikra MR had some level of input-  that the aleph in "vaYikra" should be
small.

Now, we know from the sneh habo'er that Moshe, in all his anava and a few
other factors, resisted leadership.  I don't know if I'd go so far as to say
"self doubt"-  perhaps a very subtle and refined level of self-doubt.  His
major complaints to Hashem throughout the chumashim were to the effect that
the burden of leadership was beyond his capacity to bear- that he really did
not qualify as the go'el.

MR's understanding and sensitivity to the issue was clear and acute.  When
the people complained at the rock,  he knew what was at stake.  The people
who murmered did not realize the overall damaging effects of their
complaints on the whole process of redemption, but Moshe was keenly aware-
and this affected him in that aspect of "yesh" that he still had-  his
capacity to lead Am Israel.
There are two places in the Torah where we see the expression "Hamin.."
"from...?"   By the etz hada'as and by the sela in this parsha. One source
given for Haman is "hamin  ha etz...".  Might not "hamin hasela also be a
remez?".  Haman is Amalek-   Amalek signifies safek- doubt.
This may have caused the striking of the rock.    Mrs. GA

First off-  Halacha and the facts are clearly more important than
conjectures.  The human mind has a netiya to find patterns where patterns
don't really exist.  The chief reason that I'm suspicious of conspiracty
theories presented is that they are just too neat-  and because of the
reasons that Rav Bleu mentions- too many people would be "in the know".  In
a country like Israel you would expect a meaningful exposure by now.  There
has been such an exposure of Raviv, despite attempts to cover the issue and
confuse the public.  I'd encourage anyone to consult Josh on pertinent real
evidence, and you may draw your own conclusions.

Secondly-  Perhaps the list would like to discuss the parameters of "rodef".
Although we rule that rodef does not apply to the cases mentioned, how would
the international community react if 'rodef' was indeed applicable?
EMPHASIS - I do NOT bring these arguments to condone the actions of the
following people, but as a limud exercise for the list.

Yigal Amir brought "rodef" and "min" as defence for his action.  Obviously
his act was as ineffectual as jousting at windmills, as well as murder and a
massive chilul Hashem. In what situation would it be appropriate?  If so,
would it get the support of the UN?  Would that matter if urgent Jewish
interests would otherwise be sacrificed?

(Barring conspiracy theories) One defence brought for the act of Goldstein
was that he had heard threatening chants from the Arabs in Chevron-
according to rumours (I emphasise rumours- the IDF could verify ) he wasn't
the only one who heard them.  Now, they were worshipping in Ma'arat
haMachpela, not marching down the street, and one does not assume that every
threat made by an Arab will be followed immediately by action.  (Thank G-d)

However, if there is a principle that if you KNOW  that your enemy will come
to kill you, you should act first.  This applies even before the murderer
sets forth.

We could seriously fault BG for acting prematurely, in a holy place and
without sure knowledge, but if such a definite situation existed,  how would
we judge it?  ( btw Even if the Jewish community-  with all the necessary
evidence-  were to condone the act,  I'm sure the UN would still oppose it-
does this affect the outcome of the psak?)   Again, the ikar-  we need the
facts.   I stress that the halachic question is a theoretical question, and
NOT an attempt to mitigate BGs action, (unless, of course, there really is
indisputable supporting evidence)

Now we move onto Yoram Skolnick.  He shot and killed a terrorist who had
been caught and subdued.  YS is in jail on a life term.
According to halacha, the Arab was subdued and 'rodef' no longer applies.
However, we have another problem here.  What if "subdued" is only temporary?
What if there is a likelyhood that the terrorist will be released (as, for
example, a "nice gesture" on Ramadan)-  and that he would almost definitely
return to terrorism?  Do all terrorists without charata get a din of rodef
in these conditions?      I welcome the analysts on the list to explore
these questions al pi sechel.

Mrs. G. Atwood.

In case I've upset anyone I owe it to the list to make my sentiments clear
re  Talmud Torah and distractions.
I speak from a position of deep concern and some exasperation.  Clearly, we
want our boys in the system because of the Kedusha and Tahara there.
The menahel and the Rebbes are on the whole deeply caring and wonderful
human beings.  However, we've all found ourselves in a current of attitude
which does not address the needs and potentialities of all the boys, and we
have no right to allow these korbanos.  Obviously, the parents have to do
what we can to inspire the boys and imbue them with love and respect for
their teachers and their learning despite the shortcomings of the system.
E.g. our 13 year old, now in eighth grade-  Baruch Hashem he has a good head
and is proud of his learning.  He's in cheder for more than nine hours a
day.  Barring eating and sleeping, that leaves precious few hours for our
influence.  He refuses to view even the most innocent movies because he
knows they distract him from learning and davenning and we encourage him in
this derech.  Does he have the potential to be a gadol?  Who knows?  If he
has the ratzon. Not all gedolim have been ilu'im.  If not, perhaps he'll go
into business.
In his precious small spare time he cares for the pigeons he breeds.  One
Rebbe has already told him not to get so involved in such shtuyot.
Come the Beis haMikdash, where will the Rebbe buy his gozlim for korbanot?
Could be he'll be coming to the dovecotes of his own pupil.  Perhaps if the
Rebbe thought in terms of Torah le'ma'aseh he'd see that such wordly (and
inoffensive) hobbies have their own kedusha.

That boys should learn totally lishma is a very nice but a very mature
idea -  not enough to inspire many boys to put in long hours unless you have
a really gevaldig teacher.
Btw someone (sorry, forgot who) posted some time back re Heschel that the
attitude that halacha doesn't have intrinsic value but only value in terms
of its potential to draw a person closer to Hashem is a chassidic approach.
I'm not so sure about that.  If something doesn't have an intrinsic value,
how can it bring a person closer to Hashem?  Al pi kaballa each mitzva has
profound effect and therefore profound intrinsic value.      Mrs.  G.
Atwood.

In a message dated 1/3/00 6:53:12 AM Eastern Standard Time, David Finch 
writes:

<< << If his learning is up to par for his grade level i.e. he is doing well
  in school,  and reviewing at home for a reasonable amount of time,  I
  would allow sports or other recreational activities of a kosher/parve
  nature.   >>
 
 I hope that the kosher/parve sports include baseball, ice hockey, tennis, 
 soccer, and basketball, not necessarily in that order. What would they not 
 include?
 
I totally agree that PLAYING all of these sports are kosher/pareve and should 
be encouraged in children. Not to do so could have a devastating effect on 
their development. However, being a FAN of a professional sports team does 
not seem to me to be kosher at all. This was pointed out by RYGB in a letter 
to the Torah umadda journal and I believe the response he received from the 
author of the article was totally inadequate. There is almost no such thing 
as a mild sports fan, especially among kids. They frequently get completely 
obsessed with sports. I can still recite the batting order of the 1977 
Yankees better than the mesechtos in shas. This wastes Valuable "bytes" of 
memory that can be used for Torah (or even for madda!). Also, athletes be it 
Babe Ruth or Michael Jordan, or even such "good citizens" like Dr. J or Wayne 
Gretzky are not what we want children to emulate.  

RS Ominsky wrote:

>>Going back a few months, we had a discussion of baby wipes on Shabbat, 
and I faxed RYGB a couple of pages from Menuchat Ahava and Yalkut Yosef on 
the subject.>>

Sorry I missed it.  I heard from R. Shlomo Pearl that R. Moshe Bick 
paskened that baby wipes are permissible.

MG Atwood wrote:

>>I learned that it's a custom that women don't wash mayim achronim 
formally at the table with the men- (btw the usual mayim achronim sets are 
inadequate if you hold by the shita of washing to the knuckles- where 
fingers meet hands  ). However, there is an assumption that women will 
rinse the hands betzniut in the kitchen on the last of our visits. At any 
rate,  acc. to one of our LORs-  Rav Elazar Barclay-  mayim achronim is an 
equal chiuv for women and one should not talk between MA and benching.   
GA>>

It is also possible to compare mayim acharonim to heseiba at the Pesach 
seder.  There is an opinion that heseiba is unnecessary and, due to 
whatever reasons, women have historically relied on that shitah.  
Similarly, there is an opinion that mayim acharonim is unnecessary and 
women rely on that shitah.  If the Rema was willing to accept women's 
leniency by heseiba then we should accept it also by mayim acharonim.

RC Sherer wrote:

>>On what basis do you conclude that the government of Israel has the 
status of Melech? That isn't the conclusion I draw from the Rambam in 
Hilchos Melachim!>>

R. Hershel Schachter has a relatively famous article on this subject which 
is included in his sefer Be'Ikvei HaTzon.

RS Godick wrote:

>>And I wonder if this impression that Ashkenazi psak tends to be more 
machmir than Sephardi psak is in fact statistically correct.   Anyone have 
any idea?>>

Offhand, Sefardim are more machmir regarding meat (the famous Bet Yosef) 
and bishul akum.  My vague impression from Orach Chaim is that the Rama 
tends to be more meikel but it varies.

gil.student@citicorp.com wrote:

> 
> RS Godick wrote:
> 
> >>And I wonder if this impression that Ashkenazi psak tends to be more 
> machmir than Sephardi psak is in fact statistically correct.   Anyone have 
> any idea?>>
> 
> Offhand, Sefardim are more machmir regarding meat (the famous Bet Yosef) 
> and bishul akum.  My vague impression from Orach Chaim is that the Rama 
> tends to be more meikel but it varies.
> 


I was going to say the same. I think it's a general impression a lot of
people have, though it's not necessarily valid. I do find myself wondering
at what I see as unnecessary humrot sometimes, though.

I must admit I haven't been through the Mishna Berura, but from the
cursory examination I have given it, it does seem that he tends to be
more mahmir, with meat being a notable exception.

Speaking of meat, I saw the other day in the Ish Mazliah Hagaddah, a bit
about meat for the hag, and the language there is very strong as regards
non-Bet Yosef meat (harei zu terefah). Assuming that this is the accepted
position (it's not, as far as I know), would that mean that restaurants
that serve non-Bet Yosef meat would be off-limits even for non-meat items
(harei zu terefah)?

Another notable exception is eruv. All the discussion here about the
Chicago eruv a while back made me laugh. It's a moot point to us. The
streets are too wide.


---sam

> Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2000 23:30:52 EST
> From: DFinchPC@aol.com
> Subject: Re: Avodah V4 #244


<< I hope that the kosher/parve sports include baseball, ice hockey, 
tennis,  soccer, and basketball, not necessarily in that order. What
would they not include?>>

	My intention was that the kosher/parve label refer to entertainment in
general.  I assumed that sports were fine unless one can conjure up an
egregious exception.  It's things like TV/video/computer games which need
more "hashgacha"

Gershon

On Mon, Jan 03, 2000 at 02:43:19PM +0200, Mrs. Gila Atwood wrote:
: Re Micha Berger's post-  I'm not sure what you mean by your identification
: of two levels as one.
: Please enlighten me.

That's what I intended to do with the following (which you quote).

:> Moshe's anava & work of spiritual refinement led him to be zocheh to a
:> degree of yedias Hashem which enabled him to see through  a clear
:> aspaklaria.


IOW, one doesn't *earn* "seeing" HKBH bi'aspaklaria hame'ira by having a
certain level of yedi'ah. Rather, that level of yedi'ah is what the expression
"aspaklaria hame'ira" refers to. They aren't two steps, but one. Think
about what seeing something through a clearer lens means -- it means you
see more of a less-distorted truth -- exactly what yedi'as haBorei means.

: Now, we know from the sneh habo'er that Moshe...

BTW, and totally tangential, if we've correctly identified the s'neh as a rubus
sanctus (which not only is the scholarly guess, but also fits the medrash:
downward pointing thorns that tear, flowers like small roses, red berries
that turn black and are usable as an insecticide), there's an interesting
added element to HKBH's symbology. The rubus sanctus was commonly used as
a protective hedge around ones orchard or vineyard. (Thanks to Rev Bernd
Koschland, editor of the United Synagogue of London's weekly parashah sheet
"Daf Hashavua" for pointing this out.)


Back to the discussion, I question RCB's statement:
: No.  Ratzon Hashem means G-d's expressed will.  If G-d had not expressed his
: desire as to what was the appropriate course of action how can you call it a
: violation of his ratzon?

IIUC, you said that "lack of bechirah" means "lack of choice to do ratzon
Hashem", which you're now defining as only those retzonos that are expressed.

First, obviously Moshe Rabbeinu was expected to know Hashem's ratzon in
acting on his own WRT the selah, because he was punished for not knowing
it. So, if it's sufficiently expressed for Moshe to be held culpable, why
isn't it included.

Second, and this may just be the flipside of the last paragraph, where's
the midas hadin in this? There is only justice in Moshe Rabbeinu getting
punishment if bechirah was involved in the ma'aseh.

Third, if you're arguing that the choice to be made was between emes and
sheker in determining Hashem's ratzon, I would agree. (And we only disagree
over using the jargon "bechirah chafshi" for it.) But that was what I had
said to begin with -- likening his bechirah to that of Adam kodem hacheit
lishitas haRambam. So I assume you mean otherwise.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 30-Dec-99: Chamishi, Shemos
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 91b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         

<From: "Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer"
<sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu> Subject: Re: YU is a Litvishe yeshiva in the
mold of Volozhin (?) Curious objections, RMF. I am ot sure I even understand
them. I would think Rabbi Lessin, longtime Mashgiach at YU, would probably
differ with you on the issue of mussar. And, of course YU was patterned on
Telshe. That is where Dr. Revel originated.> 

Curious?  If I haven't been sufficiently clear, let me articulate the
differences more sharply.  RYGB's original post glosses over the very real
differences between so called "musar" yeshivas, the protoype being slabodka,
and non-musar (better yet anti-musar) yeshivas, after the prototype of
voloshin.  these were not small differences as they led to the actual
breakup of existing yeshivas, ongoing guerilla warfare within others, and an
haskqofic and methodological divide in the actual educational substance
indulged in by the yeshiva. Since it was actually quite a big deal I do not
understand why RYGB finds this distinction "curious".  As well, the casual
grouping of quite disparate figures such as a leading musar mentsch like R.
Dessler with such as the CI and then both of them with voloshin and the "yu
derech" is a breathtakingly audacious homogenization.
   
But perhaps what he finds curious is my assertion that YU (set aside the
uncomfortable grafting of secular stuff/torah/madah for the moment) was not
a "musar" yeshivah.   if so - and he can speak for himself - this is also
puzzling since by no stretch of the imagination, despite the presence of r.
lesin noted by RYGB, can yu/riets be identified as such.  indeed it is
precisely in this sense that yu does owe much to voloshin, the paradigmatic
anti-musar institution -where it was a common saying that learning a blat
gimoroh was the best musar.   to suggest, as does RYGB, that the presence of
a mashgiach in the form of R. Lesin somehow put it in the musar camp  is to
seriously misunderstand the daily reality of riets (and an appropriately
relevant point to claim my own bona fides as a been-there-done-that aid
re'eyoh- I was intimately associated with RIETS for a long time, including
an eleven year stint as a talmid min haminyon).  first of all the
establishment of a mashgiach position does not make one a musar intitution,
hoh ra'ayoh the very anti-pole of musar, voloshin itself, had a mashgiach. -
indeed  the very position of mashgiach was invented at voloshin,
necessitated by the new student-administration structural relationships
pioneered by the voloshin experiment. secondly with regard to R. Lesin
himself, though a wonderful man - and I do not want to suggest the slightest
personal disrespect for someone of such midos and sincerity - the simple
fact is that his influence on the yeshiva and talmidim was zippo (though no
doubt there were some individual exceptions over the many years).   His
formal contact with talmidim was mostly limited to brief visits to the
various shiurim generally prior to a yom tov, wherein he would deliver a
"musar shmooze" - this btw, being the only formal musar "training" offered
at yu and hence my iqqar point.  this shmooze was generally resented by the
rebbe whose regular gimoroh shiur was being pre-empted, and treated as a
piece of period theater by the talmidim- something like a kabuki performance
complete with traditional costumes and set forms - and was of course
delivered in a very soft spoken and hard to hear yiddish - which at least
half of the amreicanized class did not understand anyway (even in the
"yiddish" track as many talmidim only followed the simple "technical
yiddish" needed to understand a regular shiur with one of the european
roshei yeshiva).  the only other regular contact with the yu mashgiach was
his habit of patrolling the old main bais medrash and leaning over the
talmidim's sholders to remove pens and pencils lying on the gimorohs, some
of them placed there on purpose by chutzpediqs for the sole purpose of
irritating him . happily one of the few childish opportunities to stick it
to authority in which I wasn't nichshal, though i disagreed with his
perception of the lack of kovode for the sefer with a pen in it.   now that
you've got me reminiscing i'll mention that during my many years at RIETS I
generally had more contact with R. Lesin's grandson than the mashgiach
himself - as the youngest member of an informal group that would break into
the gym to play basketball after hours.  his grandson, some years older than
me, frequently led those midnight forays and was quite expert at the
mechanical techniques of breaking and entry.  this may have presaged a later
career move - can't help being reminded of the gimoroh at the very end of
shabbos  which speaks to sublimating natural (mazal dictated) impulses -  as
I understand he later became a surgeon, doubtless another exemplar of hkbh's
sense of humor, kaviyochol.  But r.lesin's presence hardly made yu a musar
place, anymore than did the presence of r. mendel zaks - the chofeitz
chaim's son-in-law who also made rare appearances in each classroom as the
"bochain" to test the talmidim once or twice a year - generally a hilarious
production conducted in an almost indecipherable yiddish filtered through
the cloud of tobacco smoke which always enveloped his face.

RYGB agreed with my suggestion that yu rather owes much to telz, accurately
pointing out that Revel was oleh to yu from telz.  since it is not much fun
when people just agree with me (though more accurate of course) I will have
to take the desperate step of disagreeing with myself in order to respond
appropriately to him on this one.  or at least I need to clarify what I
think the nature of the debt is. I suspect - and here he may want to clarify
himself - that we may not have the same vision of the debt owed to telz.
Telz, at least in the earliest decades, was definitely not a musar yeshiva
either.  in fact there were bitter fights surrounding the attempted
introduction of musar into telz by the administration but opposed by the
extremely well organized talmidim, and all such attempts were generally
beaten back during the earlier years when r. shimon shkop was giving a shiur
and r. lazar gordon ran the place. e.g. strong minded musar mashgichim were
essentially run off, student strikes were called, a group of twenty senior
musar talmidim specifically exported by the slabodka alter to telz as a
fifth column to shore up the musar forces were driven out, etc.  there was
no uniformity in the telz administration either since r. lazar gordon's
support always seemed a bit lukewarm as opposed to r. bloch, a musar
qano'ie.    It was only in 1910 when R. Bloch returned to take over telz
that musar really caught on.  Now this is all quite relevant to the aliyah
of Dr. revel to yu, which in fact occurred prior to the triumph of musar
forces in telz, and at a time when the student body was still pretty solidly
anti-musar.  The debt that I had in mind was more of a similarity in
educational structure. i.e. rather than the one-big-bais-medrash model with
most of the learning entirely independent as in voloshin, riets had class
structures, advancement to "higher" shiurim after specific periods of time,
metrics for progress, etc. , all introduced into the litvish yeshiva world
by telz.   even here, to continue arguing with myself, the debt was not
really direct, since those types of educational structures were already
familiar, and practiced, by the proto-yu by virtue of its immersion in
american educational culture.  

A last note.  while some of the yu rabbeim in the past may have spent some
time in slabodka - though as I'm typing here in stream of consciousness mode
they're not springing to mind,  I'd say that most had nothing to do with the
slabodka-musar tradition and in any event no trace of a formal musar shiur
raised its head there.  one of the very first great "catches" by yu - the
maidjetser iluit (r. shilomo polochek) was not only a student of voloshin
(one of the youngest ever admitted. so young they decided to give him
special bichinos, contra to the voloshin derech of benign neglect, to make
sure he was advancing properly) but a favorite student of r. chaim brisker,
i.e. the avi avos of anti-musar.  and of course the soloveitchiks, pere et
fils,  also represented a voloshin contnuity.  aside from the rov, other
notable european roshei yeshivah whom I learned with, e.g. r. gorelik, r.
dovid lifshutz, r. henoch fishman, r. sheinberg,  r. yankelovitch,...
were all non musarniks, and I think all, or most, hailed from the Mir.  I do
not think that R. dessler would necessarily have been happy being grouped
with the yu derech  represented by the above.

Mechy Frankel					W; (703) 325-1277
michael frankeldtra.mil				H; (301) 593-3949

RRH asks for three baseball halochos - OK, i'll bite: in order of increasing
importance it is obvious that:
1: as a shoveh pirutoh, a baseball is recommended to effect the qidushin
under the chupah. it is more useful afterwards as well.  additionally, if
the misadeir qidushin could be persuaded to autograph it, and he is a well
known individual, it is likely to increase in value even more rapidly than
some especially rare gidolim cards. 
2: pitching a fork ball too efficiently may be osur, at least according to
the rambam's shitoh in mi'onein. it should similarly have been osur for a
jewish manager to play willie mays in centerfield.
3: the thrower of an intended brushback pitch which unfortunately actually
takes the batter's head off may be potur as a pisiq reisha di'loa nichoh
leih.

Mechy Frankel				W: (703) 325-1277
michael.frankel@dtra.mil		H: (301) 593-3949	

On Mon, Jan 03, 2000 at 03:44:54PM +0200, Mrs. Gila Atwood wrote:
: Btw someone (sorry, forgot who) posted some time back re Heschel that the
: attitude that halacha doesn't have intrinsic value but only value in terms
: of its potential to draw a person closer to Hashem is a chassidic approach.
: I'm not so sure about that.  If something doesn't have an intrinsic value,
: how can it bring a person closer to Hashem?  Al pi kaballa each mitzva has
: profound effect and therefore profound intrinsic value.

There's a famous question why Avraham Avinu waited for the tzivui before
performing milah. After all, wasn't he mekayeim kol hatorah kulah? The
Brisker Rav's (also famous) teirutz is that until the skin was declared by
HKBH to have the din of arlah, it wasn't arlah. Therefore there was nothing
to do milah on -- there was no orlah to remove!

As I heard R' Olshin (of Lakewood) repeat this vort (he was speaking about
mal vilo para *), I was wondering about kashrus. There was a concept of
"beheimah asher einenu tihorah" as far back as Noach. Why not say that until
HKBH assured all but ma'alei geirah umafreses parsah there was no concept,
and therefore Avraham had no issur against eating pork?

It would seem that milah lacks some kind of intrinsic value that is inherent
in this din of kashrus, at least l'fi the Brisker Rav. No?

To answer Mrs. Atwood's question: Following ratzon haBorei has value, whether
there is also inherent value to the bakashah or not. There is merit to the
simple notion of "ana avda diKudsha berich Hu". The Rambam, in the Moreh,
attributes many decisions about mitzvos to the simple notion of "well,
HKBH needed to choose *something* to standardize the mitzvah". (See RYGB's
earlier citation of this idea in the archives.)

*) About mal vilo para: Anyone have a good answer for why the berachah
of "lehachniso bivriso shel Avraham Avinu" on peri'ah? Peri'ah post-dates
Avraham, first appearing biymei Yehoshua. Of course, this raises the whole
question of bal tosif...

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 30-Dec-99: Chamishi, Shemos
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 91b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         

I would think that baseball, being a means of physical excericize that isn't
too boring to expect a kid to pursue regularly, is a chiyuv di'Oraisa midin
"vinishmartem mi'od linafshoseichem".

Anyone who has a stationary bike collecting dust in the basement knows that
the hardest part of excercize is making it interesting enough to make you keep
at it. Baseball qualifies. For most people; YMMV, as does mine.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 30-Dec-99: Chamishi, Shemos
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 91b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         

> However, being a FAN of a professional
> sports team does
> not seem to me to be kosher at all.

That is the reason the cheder system here discourages soccer and basketball.
They feel that the boys will inevitably be drawn to fandom.

(Rather than educate about, they legislate against)

Akiva


A reality check a day keeps
the delusions at bay (Gila Atwood)

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

On a different track, a point I've used in speaking to non-frum Jews. They
often object to the level of detail required by halachah. After all, does
HKBH really care if I pour water over my teabag or put my teabag into the
cup after the water? (Or which side of the neck I shecht from? <grin>)

However, these same people were so medayeik, 15 years ago or so, in the dinim
of pine tar on baseball bats. They can understand the need for clearly defined
rules. You can point out to them that if a mere game requires such definition,
why wouldn't religion.

It's worked for me. At least in getting certain relatives to appreciate
our viewpoint.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 30-Dec-99: Chamishi, Shemos
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 91b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         

In a message dated 1/3/00 12:39:22 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
Michael.Frankel@dtra.mil writes:

<< Michael.Frankel@dtra.mil >>
Mechy,
What years were you at YU?

While I agree with your general thrust about R. Lesin and R. Zachs,  Bmchilat 
kvodcha, I think you may have been a bit too sharp in your description(I'm 
not disagreeing with the facts, just the tone). Please forgive me if my 
tochecha is misplaced.
Kol Tuv,
Joel

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


[ 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         ]