Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 292

Friday, January 14 2000

• Re[2]: Intrinsic value, kashrus vs arlah
• Re[2]: Kavana beTfilah
• Re[2]: How is Rav Soleveitchik ztzl considered modern Orthod
• Re: How is Rav Soleveitchik ztzl considered modern Orthodox
• Re: Mazel Tov
• Re: sephardic pronunciation
• Re[2]: talking in shul
• Mixed seating at weddings
• Internet and Issur Histaklus Binashim

Perhaps whtat's why it is a "bris milah" and not JUST a milah.

W/O the bris, the mila had no intrinsic significance.

OR

If the orlah had SOME chisaron, it was still not enough to do a Milah w/o the 
bris.  So Avrohom waited for the Bris to do the milah, in order to mekayem 2 
aspects, removing the orlah AND fulfiling the Bris.

Rich Wolpoe



______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Intrinsic value, kashrus vs arlah 
without a tzivui.

Very good, thanks.  So this would seem to imply that re mila there WAS no 
chisaron before the tzivui. Could we say that Avraham Avinu reached a stage 
in his spiritual development where his status changed in such a way that 
something which was not a chisaron, now becomes a chisaron?

funny I concentrate MUCH better with my eyes closed.  An open siddur leaves my 
eyes open, too & then I notice other people etc.

In terms of avoid a groove, an eitzo I say (I think from a Breslover Pamphlet) 
is to change the siddur from time to time.

Rich wolpoe




______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Kavana beTfilah 


davar rishon-  use a siddur!  Don't do it by heart. It is too easy to get 
into a groove.
Rav Segal of Manchester zatzal was always makpid to use a siddur, even for 
borei nefashos.  If we recite it by heart we're not using those parts of the 
brain that are fully conscious-  at least not for any sustained length of 
time.

<snip>
(Some of you guys might be chassidim yet... :-)    Mrs GA

the old litvisher ways are gone.  They probably won't even live in memory 
because the histories will no doubt be sanitized.

Let me just say on the record that when I visited Yehsiva X circa 1965- which 
used to be classci Litvak - I was told that peios, gartel and wearing tzitzis 
out were no-no's in the 1950's, and only recently did they tolerate them.

Rich Wolpoe


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: How is Rav Soleveitchik ztzl considered modern Orthodox?


I have not been following this thread religiously, so perhaps this was 
already raised, but it seems to me, based on my experience only, that 
seperate seating at Misnagdishe events is very recent, perhaps the last 
twenty years. I have always understood it to have something to do with the 
cross pollination taking place, especially in N. Y., between the Chasidic 
communities which have always followed this practice, and the Lithuanian 
communities, which generally have not. In the last number of years, there 
have been more "mixed marriages," more young men of Chasidic stock learning 
in the classic Lithuanian Yeshivas, and more contact between leaders in the 
various communities than ever. It is not surprising that some practices creep 
into the Lithuanian world. 
<snip>
Jordan   

Clearly, then, this is a matter of opinion!

Rich Wolpoe


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________

	Do you have reason to believe that there is more kiruv done by YU'ers 
and Hirschians than by "blacks" among "educated assimilated Jews"?  I 
will not assert the opposite,  but am fairly sure that the statement

"understanding contemporary culture" (AKA secularly educated) =  ability 
to do kiruv

is not grounded in fact.

Gershon

Harry Maryles wrote:

> 
> I'm happy to inform the Chevra that my daughter Tova
> got engaged  to Neal Kirschner of Chicago last night.
> 


B'Sha'ah Tovah


---sam

there's a lot more to this...

1) the Ashkenazim in EY by and large spoke yiddish NOT Hebrew

2) Eliezer Ben Yehduda pretty much was a one-man movement to restore hebrew as a
spoken language.

3) I am fuzzy on the details, but he either felt that sefardic pronounciation 
was more authentic or more appropriate to the Midel East and therefore pick IT 
to be the standard.  NO doubt the larger sefardic population was a factor 
*combined* with the fact taht few ahskenazim SPOKE Hebrew.

Several anecdotes about Ben Yehdua

Ben Yehuda was a a secular Jew, but was so fanatic about Heberw that he acutally
donned Tallis and tefilln for a about a year or so just to win over observant 
Jews.  (he later gave up both tallis and Tefillin and trying to win over the 
frum Jews)

He also refused to speak anything but Hebrew to his son, and his son was just 
about hte only Hebrew-speaking kid around in those days.

Rich Wolpoe

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: sephardic pronunciation 
Author:  <avodah@aishdas.org> at tcpgate
Date:    1/13/2000 9:01 AM



Ari asks

<< I am interested in both the historical development of  the various 
pronunciations of Hebrew as well as the halachik ramifications. I find 
it perplexing that despite the fact that most of the early settlers of 
modern Israel were Ashkenazim, the Sephardik pronunciation became the 
dominant one. Does anyone know how this came about (historically? 
motivations?)? Is anyone familiar
with scholarly and halachik research that discusses how and
when the various pronunciations of Hebrew developed and which are more 
"authentic"? >>

On the contrary most of the early population of Israel was sephardi 
because the Turks did not recognize the European communities.

I have an article in the RJJ journal on the halachot of the 
pronunciation.

Eli Turkel

I seem recall that  R. S. Schwab  would pronounce this mishebeirach at KAJ once 
or twice a year. 

Rich Wolpoe

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: talking in shul 
Gershon Dubin wrote:
:                             I believe the Tosfos Yom Tov said many tzoros 
: came to Klal Yisrael as a consequence.

I think he specifically said Ta"Ch viTa"t did. The Tos' Y"T also wrote a Mi 
sheBeirach for people who don't speak during davening or leining, that I've 
been trying to get our gabbai to say as added assistance for my yeitzer hatov 
(which doesn't do to hot with this one).

-mi

I had written:

>> Moreover, if one accepts the Levush's analysis (and not all Aharonim
>>  do),

And RY Zirkind asks:

>What about Bochurim in Yeshiva who come to the wedding???

The answer is: it depends whom you ask.  If you read the teshuvah of the
Bah (Hadashot, YD, 55), you will see that he says that the se'udot on
Friday night and Shabbat morning included only bahurim and betulot and
therefore "ein bo hirhurei averah."

On the other hand, in our day, R. YH Henkin (Benei Banim I, no. 35)
writes that singles should be seated separately even if if others are
not because they "always" have hirhurim.

Kol tuv and Shabbat shalom,

Eli Clark

 ------------------------------

Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 13:09:26 -0800 (PST)
From: Harry Maryles <hmaryles@yahoo.com>
Subject: RE:Mixed Seating

 - --- "Frenkel, Garry J." <garry.j.frenkel@ssa.gov>
wrote:
>
> >>"Especially when the Previous RY of Chaim Berlin,
> R
> Yitzchak Hutner, ZTL did not act that way. Why does
> R.
> Aharon Schechter do this?  Is he saying that mixed
> seating is Assur? Is he saying that he is Frummer
> than
> R. Hutner?  There are Photos of R. Moshe Fienstien
> and
> R. Yaakov Kaminetsky sitting mixed. Rav  Aaron
> Soloveitchik actually requests sitting next to his
> wife even at a seperate seating affair. So it can't
> be
> Assur.  I DON'T GET IT!!!  R. Rogov ZTL, when asked
> about mixed seating by one of his brightest
> talmidim,
> Rabbi Erwin Giffen ZL, whose wedding was mixed,
> answered, "In Lita zennen mir nit geven makpid" (In
> Lithuania we weren't Makpid)."
> >>
>
> I don't see what difference who did what when makes.
>  I know a great Rav who
> used to watch television to relax and probably just
> to get a glimpse of the
> popular culture.  Does that mean he would do so
> today.  There is a big
> difference between wholesomeness of the Andy
> Griffith Show and I Love Lucy
> and the constant barrage of licentiousness in
> today's shows such as Friends
> and Seinfeld. Can it not be argued that the our
> society's acceptance of what
> is clearly immoral has subtly, or maybe not so
> subtly, worked its way into
> the psyche's of those of us who spend much of our
> time in, and try to take
> advantage of the best of, popular culture. I
> remember my parents (Europeans)
> regulary visiting with close friends who they always
> addressed as Mr. or
> Mrs. rather than by their first names.  Today there
> is a much more informal
> attitude between people, and that informal attitude
> coupled with all of the
> emphasis placed on sexuality in the adverstising and
> media, puts us more at
> risk than ever. If that's the case why doesn't it
> make sense to put
> additional Harchokas in place.

I think you are mixing apples and cranberries. (I'm
tired of oranges)

There is a major difference between sitting at a mixed
table at a wedding and watching pritzus in the
entertainment media. In the first instance there are
no issurei ervah, tznius, or, in our day an age,
michsholim to hirhurei ervah.  Women at O weddings,
even MO weddings, by and large dress in a Tznius
fashion. We have plenty of poskim who are matir mixed
seating (see Eli Clark's post on the well known
rationale by LeVush on his heter for mixed seating)).
OTOH TV shows like "Friends" offer us the absolute
worst of moral attitudes in our American culture. Even
though I own a TV and do watch it on occasion, I am
appalled by what passes for acceptable family
entertainment these days.  I can certainly understand
those who wish to ban it even though I don't agree
with an outright ban.

HM
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com

 ------------------------------

Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 13:42:45 -0800 (PST)
From: Harry Maryles <hmaryles@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Annoyance

 - --- "Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer"
<sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu> wrote:
> This report from the e-mail Yated drives me
> (specifically) crazy. You would
> think, from reading it, that there are no female
> principals in schools that
> are under the TuM umbrella. The irony is that the
> essay was written by a
> woman!
>
> As the husband of the principal of a Bais Yaakov HS,
> I am annoyed.
>
> It is almost enough to make pro-yo'atzot (don't
> worry, not quite :-) ).

Isn't it a cardinal tenent of Judaism that women are
to be kept barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen? :)

What emense benefit could be had by getting the
perspective of bright and cutting edge principals such
as Shoshanah M. Bechhofer, perhaps the brightest star
in Chicago Chinuch today!  Could the reason possibly
be the "unspoken" Agudist  rule against publicly
featuring women speakers in  front of men?  If that's
it then it shows what a bad  rule it is. We are
eliminating some of the best and  the brightest from
publicly addressing issues which affect our children.
These are front line people that  we all need to hear
from and can learn a lot from. IMHO  this is a major
flaw in the conference and diminishes it's relevance.
Obviouly a lot of work has  to be done to change RW
hearts and minds.

After reading the Yated Article my first impression
was, that except for the glaring ommision of women on
the program, it seemed to be almost a model of Achdus.
(which makes the ommision of women even more
glaring)The list of featured speakers included people
from HTC, Telshe, Philly, Bais Yaakov Jewish Parochial
School(RW) and Arie Crown Hebrew Dayschool (ACHDS),
and even YU and Lubavitch.  The fact that R. Svei is
willing to be listed with a YU principal is pretty
amazing considering that he believes the Rosh
HaYeshiva and President of YU is a Sonei HaShem. (BTW
When R. Herschel Schechter was in Gush and was asked
by a Talmid about this incident R. Schechter said that
when he heard that R. Svei had said this about Dr.
Lamm he wanted to tera Kriah)
I  also noticed some Ed.D's and Ph.D's on the program.


Whasup Widat?

On the one hand we are hearing constantly about the
trend away from secular studies in the RW Yeshivos
especially in Israel but even in the US.  OTOH we see
a TuM conference that includes experts with high
secular degrees. Obviously these people are valued as
experts. and they are involved with being Mechanech
our children. Yet, they have been trained by secular
universities and that is in the main where they get
their expertise. How can this be? Either you think
secular studies is a waste of time and nobody goes to
college or you think it does have value.  Which is it?


C'mon... where is Daas Torah here? Can we eat our cake
and have it, too?

Isn't a contradiction to say Bnei Torah shouldn't go
to college and then at the same time value Ph.D's and
Ed.D's, by having them speak to us as experts? Isn't
this a Tarti DisAsri?

I would love to hear a RW explanation of this
phenomenon. I don't want to hear apologetics. If
someone says that they went to college Bidieved
because they couldn't make it in learning I'll
have a cow.

HM

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com

 ------------------------------

Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 13:40:44 -0800 (PST)
From: Daniel Levine <daniel2121_99@yahoo.com>
Subject: [none]

> My son once commented to me that the reason so many
> Yeshiva Bachurim in Israel smoke Cigarettes is that
> all other forms of pleasure have been taken away
> from
> them and that is the only vice they have left.  (!)
>
> If this theory is correct, one would expect to see
> an
> equal amount of smoking among charedi women.
>
> Yet, it is my understanding that smoking among
> orthodox women, for whatever reason, is almost
> nonexistent (unless I have my facts wrong).

>That's probably because amongst Charedim, cultural
>taboos on women smoking are so strong that it's a
>non-starter for them.

>HM

Does this taboo apply in American charedi and/or MO
circles as well?

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com

 ------------------------------

Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 16:49:39 -0600
From: "Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer"
<sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>
Subject: Re: The Internet issur

I went to the website, and this is the list of signatories:

Yosef Sholom Eliashiv
Moshe Yehoshua -- Admor of Vishnitz
A. Y. L. Steinman
Yisochor Dov -- Admor of Belz
M. S. Shapira
Shmuel Halevi Wosner
Yitzchok Eizek Rosenbaum -- Admor of Zutschka
Avrohom Yaakov Friedman -- Admor of Sadigor
Michel Yehuda Lefkowitz
Tzvi Elimelech
Chaim Pinchos Scheinberg
Yaakov Yissochor Ber -- Admor of Nadvorna
S. Y. Nissim Karelitz
Yisroel Mordechai Twerski -- Admor of Rachmastrivka
Avrohom Yaakov Zalesnik
Avrohom Menachem Danziger -- Admor of Alexander
Shmuel Auerbach
Shimon Nosson Nota Biderman -- Admor of Leluv
Boruch Rosenberg
Yisroel Don Taub -- Admor of Modzhitz
Gershon Edelstein
Avrohom Shlomo Biderman -- Admor of Leluv
Shimon Ba'adani
Efraim Fishel Rabinowitz
Shalom Cohen
Menachem Nochum -- Admor of Tchernoble
Moshe Zadka
Yehoshua Rokach -- Admor of Machnovka
Games and movies of computers and all related things are a great danger
to
everyone and to children especially. It is worse to bring someone to sin
than to kill him -- Yochonon Sofer

I find it an interesting sociological tidbit that there are no
signatories
representing the three major Lithuanian yeshivos: Chevron, Mir, Ponvitch
(although perhaps R' Steiman serves for that purpose).

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

 - ----- Original Message -----
From: Sammy Ominsky <sambo@charm.net>
To: <avodah@aishdas.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2000 2:20 PM
Subject: Re: The Internet issur


> Harry Maryles wrote:
>
>
>
> > Headlines are often meant to grab your attention. In
> > any case, the above headline can be interpreted as
> > general advise and not actual Issur. The article that
> > I read could have been written by almost anyone on
> > this list (perhaps with one minor exception). If the
> > article  in the Israeli version was so radically
> > different, I would like to see a copy of it.  If what
> > you say is true, what does that say about the
> > integrity of the paper?
>
>
>
> I don't have the Hebrew Yated, but I did find the text of the
> pronouncement. Ironic, isn't it?
>
> http://www.thekosher.net/chareidi/BOad1intrnt.htm
>
>
> ---sam
>

 ------------------------------

Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 17:58:07 EST
From: DFinchPC@aol.com
Subject: Re: Politics. Money. Power. Control. (was:
Conservative/Reform/Orthodox/Whate...

In a message dated 1/13/00 1:35:45 PM US Central Standard Time,
kennethgmiller@juno.com writes:

<< This patronage business bothers me whenever I see it in the
headlines. It
 seems that whenever any of the religious parties makes any kind of
political
 deal, part of the deal is that the party gets more money for their
schools.
 The part that bothers me is that they fight for their own schools, not
 anyone else's.
  >>

Yet another excellent argument for separation of church and state, even
in
Israel -- especially in Israel.

There's more than a little irony in the typical scenario: The Israeli RW
religious elite fights to keep Western impurities out. Thus it bans or
severely limits Internet, TV, newspapers, movies, modern music, sports,
etc.
Then, the same elite decides carry on their Knesset battles according to
house rules. Thus it implicates itself (through its appointed
representatives) in bribery, trickery, embezzlement, vote-buying,
miscellaneous double-dealing and double-crossing, etc., just like any
other
bunch of politicians.

I have a naive ten-year-old son. Last year, reading the New York Times
and
watching the news on TV (sorry!), he learned about Bibi Netanyahu's
political
"tactics" as well as Bibi's several marriages, fights with the household
help, and peculiar ways of processing the truth. He asked me, "Why do
the
rabbis support such a man?" We all know why. Can anyone think of a
solution
to this problem that doesn't involve taking religion away from the
state?

David Finch

 ------------------------------

Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 23:00:59 +0000
From: Chana/Heather Luntz <Chana/Heather@luntz.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: From Arutz-7

In message , Carl M. Sherer <cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il> writes
>On 13 Jan 00, at 12:34, Gershon Dubin wrote:
>
>>  A YEAR IN JAIL FOR AGUNAH-HUSBANDS
>> The Knesset voted last night in favor of a preliminary reading of an
>> Agunah
>> (literally, a "chained woman") law.  The bill, proposed by Meretz MK Anat
>> Maor, states that a man who leaves his wife and refuses to grant her a
>> proper Jewish divorce - thus preventing her from re-marrying - will be
>> sentenced to a year in prison.
>
>This strikes me as much ado about nothing. The Batei Din here
>can and have already thrown men into jail for refusing to give their
>wives gittin. And in many (maybe even most) cases it has not
>helped. Certainly not a sentence as short as a year. That's not
>going to move most vindictive husbands (and that's usually the real
>issue IMHO) to give their wives a get. Not impressed.
>
>You want to talk about stopping them from having a bank account
>or a credit card and from getting any kind of government benefits,
>maybe we would have something a bit more serious to talk about.
>

I would guess (without having read it) that the law is aimed at is the
perceived (I don't know how true it is, but certainly there are rumours
to this effect) lack of willingness of the Rabbanut to utilise the power
they have to inflict these penalties except in the most egregarious (and
long lasting) of cases.  I would therefore expect that either the law
attempts to force the hand of the Rabbanut, or, alternatively, gives the
secular courts also the right to impose such a penalty (so if a woman is
not getting any results from the Beis Din, she could theoretically apply
to the secular courts to inforce the law).

Anybody have any information on whether my guesses are correct?

>- -- Carl

Regards

Chana
>
>
>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.
>

 - --
Chana/Heather Luntz

 ------------------------------

End of Avodah V4 #290
*********************


[ 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
     ]

In a message dated 1/14/00 9:15:04 AM Eastern Standard Time, Dovid Herskovic 
writes:
< BTW can anyone explain why some of the signatories who are there for no
 other reason that their great great grandfather may have been a
 colourful, charismatic dyslexic need be taken notice of, let alone
 heeded?>>
Is such language really necessary?
I would like to raise a few points with regard to the internet ban, and I 
would greatly appreciate a response from those who ridicule the ban.
It seems to me, that all who wrote against the ban are writing only from 
their narrow perspective without truly understanding haredim. To truly argue 
one way or another we must understand the haredi perspective. Many non-Haredi 
Orthodox Jews, and certainly those who consider themselves MO, bring into 
their homes publications such as Newsweek and the NY Times. Now, anybody who 
reads these publications is aware that they frequently have very immodest 
pictures contained in them. In the case of Newsweek these pictures are 
sometimes on the cover of the magazine.  (While I don't think it is necessary 
to give examples being that it should be obvious to anyone who reads these 
publications, but in case anyone doubts this reality just think back to a 
cover given promoting a popular movie this past year, certain pictures of the 
US women's Soccer team etc..). Despite this fact, non-Haredim bring these 
publications into their homes. Why? Because they feel the good outweighs the 
bad, they don't look at anything they shouldn't, and any passing glimpse does 
not have any effect. I do not wish to argue whether this is valid or not, for 
arguments sake lets say it is.
Haredim, however, would never allow such publications in their home. Haredim 
take the issur dioraisa of histaclus binashim very seriously. It should be 
made clear that it is not some chumra but an issur gamur and in fact is one 
of the things that is meakev teshuva. Also, many chasidic seforim speak of 
the kedusha one obtains my never seeing something he shouldn't even by 
accident. (It seems there are Breslover on the list. This is a popular theme 
in R. Nachman's thought). B'kitsur, although the MO position may be legit, 
there is no question that the Haredi position on this issue is also legit and 
possibly closer to the traditional reading of the sources.
This brings me to the Internet. Much of the conversation has surrounded the 
possibility of searching for some sight filled with filth. From the Haredi 
perspective, even if there was no such sites online the internet would be 
assur. I have AOL. Almost every other day on the WELCOME screen, where the 
mailbox is, without going to an improper site, there is a picture of an 
immodestly dressed women. Yesterday it was "get fit for the new millennium" 
with a picture of a women exercising. Other times it is an actress. Anyone 
who has AOL (or MSN) knows this to be true. While this might not bother 
non-Haredim, is it so hard to understand the Haredi perspective that this is 
assur gamur or easily leads to an issur gamur, even without going to a site 
specifically for filth? I hope this clarifies the Haredi perspective and 
would appreciate any comments. 
 
 

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


[ 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         ]