Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 340

Sunday, February 6 2000

• Re: Starting Gemara
• RE: smoking
• Re: smoking ban
• Re: Smoking and Halocho
• Re: Smoking and Halocho
• Re: Smoking and Halocho
• Re: Homosexuality & Judaism
• Not Appropriate for this Forum! Homosexuality & Judaism
• Re: smoking and sakkanah
• Re: Starting Gemara
• Re: Not Appropriate for this Forum! Homosexuality & Judaism
• Re: Starting Gemara
• Re: Not Appropriate for this Forum! Homosexuality & Judaism
• Smoking Ban
• Re: Smoking Ban
• Re: smoking and sakkanah
• Whither Avodah
• Smoking Ban
• question on parshas mispatim

On 5 Feb 00, at 21:35, Gershon Dubin wrote:

> Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2000 09:03:20 -0500
> From: gil.student@citicorp.com
> Subject: Starting Gemara
> 
> <<I heard from one yeshiva that they start teaching mishnayos in 3rd
> grade (to 8 yr olds) and gemara in 4th grade (to 9 yr olds).  Is that
> standard?  Could 
> people please specify the approximate affiliation within the MO/RW
> spectrum when stating a school's stance on this.
> 
> I would have thought that you would give boys a few years of just
> mishnayos 
> before starting gemara.  But what do I know?>>
> 
> 	In my experience,  fifth grade is fairly standard for starting Gemara
> (as is Elu Metzios).  My son just started sixth grade in a yeshiva which
> starts Gemara then,  but it is fairly unusual. I have never heard of
> starting in fourth grade.  I don't recall when they start Mishnayos,  but
> most, AFAIK,  continue with Mishnayos even after starting Gemara, at
> least for the first few years.

Here in Eretz Yisroel, my sons (both then in Chorev) started 
Mishna in second grade and Gemara in fourth. There was a Mishna 
chug (after school class) in first grade for boys who wanted it. My 
impression is that this is pretty much across the board except for a 
few schools that don't start Gemara until fifth, and except for those 
chadorim that follow literally the shita of the Mishna in Pirkei Avos, 
which of course start Gemara much later (although I am not sure 
that they actually wait until 15 for Gemara).

-- Carl


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

Carl and Adina Sherer
mailto:sherer@actcom.co.il

>
> See the pasuk - Devarim 4:15.
>

Ok -- AND 4:16-19. That's the whole context -- and as such a warning against
building idols.

Akiva



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

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

No medical authority talks about the dangers of meat and fish ? :-) Access
//alltheweb.com  for keywords: backon@vms.huji.ac.il fish meat  and you'll
see my postings on MAIL-JEWISH precisely on this subject. There's a potential
interaction between omega-6 fatty acids (in fish) and stearic acid (in beef)
that can affect prostaglandin synthesis and thus may be behind the increased
insulin resistance found in those taking omega-6 fatty acids. Whether
conjugated linolenic acid in milk affects fish oil is another matter.

Josh (who works in preventive cardiology at a leading teaching hospital)

After reading the Rav Bechhofer's comments I went back to the Shu"t of
HaRav HaLevy and Tzitz Eliezer.  It looks like they were reading his
letter when they wrote what they did, especially with regard to his
objections:

----- Original Message ----- > Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2000 22:21:26 -0600
> From: "Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer"
<sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>
> Subject: Smoking and Halocho
>
> I have been thinking a little about what I find objectionable in the
> discussion here. After all, I think smoking is bad and stupid, so
what is my
> problem (I am sure many of you have been wondering the same thing
:-) )?
>
> Let us break down, first, the issue.
>
> There are two different thrusts here:
>
> 1. Smoking is assur al pi halocho. A rabbinic pronouncement would
merely
> confirm that prohibition (psak).
> 2. Smoking may be muttar, but it should be banned. A pronouncement
would
> promulgate that ban (takkana).
>
> I have argued that stance no. 1 cannot be supported by halocho. (M'
Aviva
> Fee earlier this evening asked why this is not comparable to meat
and fish.
> Indeed, the consumption of meat and fish is not listed by the Rambam
as
> prohibited - see the Shu"t Chasam Sofer YD 101 for a discussion of
the
> issue. Perhaps, however, the Rambam felt that meat and fish is a
long term
> SSN and therefore is not to be included in his list in Chaps. 10-11
of
> Rotzei'ach, V'duk.)

Yet contrary to this stance -- Rav HaLevy states definitively that
smoking is Assur and calls the chapter (which is the first in vol. II)
"Issur HaIshun MeKo'ach HaHalacha".  The Tzitz Eliezer also finds the
issue definitely one for halacha to intervene in.

As to the 2nd, Rav HaLevy brings the following in his introduction to
the chapter: (my trx, any mistakes are mine - S.L.B.)
"I must note that one single rabbi publicly disagreed with my
conclusions, and paskened to permit smoking acc. to halacha, even
though he admits that there is a grave health hazzard involved (?).
In contrast the great flood of letters that I received has confirmed
that my opinion is accepted by Chachmei Torah (except for those who
themselves smoke, and Gazru Al Atzmam Shetika)...."

>I have argued that stance no. 2 cannot be applied in our
> day and age, for theoretical and pragmatic reasons.
> (del for bw)

> But what really bothers me is the implication of the proposals here.
In a
> sense, they seem to me thoroughly "Brisker". The underlying
assumption of
> the drive for halachic solutions to a health problem is that there
is, in
> Yahadus, only Halocho and non-Halocho. I.e., either it is assur - or
muttar.
>
> But Yahadus is not pure Halocho. There are other values beyond
"Assur" and
> "Muttar". There is the greatest question of all: "Will this activity
add to
> or detract from my Ahavas or Yiras Hashem?" And there are many other
> corollary questions, such as one which may even be halachic; "Will
this
> activity make me a naval b'reshus ha'Torah?"

I wish to address both this comment and the issue of the meaning of
the pasuk in Devarim 4 based on what Rav HaLevy says in the shu't:

"And perhaps the Sho'el will ask-- these psukim, K'fshutam, are
intended to save our souls from mistakenly following Avodah Zara, as
they end "Ki Lo Re'item Kol Temunah Beyom Devar Hashem Imachem".

It appears to me that this is the question the Rambam solves in
Hilchot Dei'ot (chapter 4, halacha 1) where he says: "Ho"il VeHeyot
HaGuf Bari Ve'Shalem, MiDarkei Hashem Hu, Sharei Ei Efshar SheYavine O
Yedah Davar MeYidi'at HaBoreh VeHu Choleh, Lefichach Tzarich Adam
LeHarchik Atzmo Midevarim HaMe'abdim Et HaGuf, U'Lehanhig Atzmo
Bedevarim HaMavri'im VeHamachlimim" and the list there is long.

The intention of the Rambam is clear, if the Torah ordered "HiShamer
Lecha...." so that you won't mistakenly follow Avodah Zarah, Raboteinu
understood with the breadth of their wisdom, the hidden meaning to
these Divrei Torah.  Is it possible to order to do or desist from
doing a person who is ill, who b/c of sickness his mind is not clear
enough to do or desist.  From here the conclusion is clear, first of
all guard (Sh'mor) your health, so that you may keep (Sh'mor) what you
were ordered at that same Ma'amad Har Sinai".

The Shu"t continues to explain and answer questions about this and
related issues, and I would recommend, once again, reading both this
shu"t (originally written Kislev 1976) and the shu"t of the Tzitz
Eliezer for a discussion of these and related issues.

> So, it seems to me that it makes our Yahadus shallow, almost
> two-dimensional, if our sole criterion is Halocho: Muttar or Assur.
Indeed,
> it seems to impart to the religious world a distinct aura of
immaturity:
> "They are not sophisticated enough to understand health issues qua
health
> issues, so let's attack them with their own weapon: religion."

I disagree here, there is nothing in Judaism that is solely halacha --
otherwise why bother with Ta'amei HaMitzvot (for ex.)?  Every issue
has a philisophical side and a halachic side.  I think that what Rav
HaLevy said in the end is relevant:  "Li'Shmor Al Bri'uto Kdei La'avod
et Elokav.." is what is important.

(And this is ignoring Soref Mamono BeYado ....)

Shoshana L. Boublil

I have seen, read and given shiur on these teshuvos of the ALR and TE (CH 51
in the Brandman Tape Library) and concluded, subsequent to that research,
that there is still no halachic basis for a ban (psak or takkana) on
smoking.

But, let me ask you, seeing that one major Ashkenazi and one major Sefardi
posek each declared smoking to be assur, how much impact do you think that
has? It certainly confirms the self righteousness of us non-smokers :-) ,
but how many smokers do you think these teshuvos have convinced to quit?

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

----- Original Message -----
From: Shoshana L. Boublil <toramada@zahav.net.il>
To: <avodah@aishdas.org>
Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2000 6:08 AM
Subject: Re: Smoking and Halocho


> After reading the Rav Bechhofer's comments I went back to the Shu"t of
> HaRav HaLevy and Tzitz Eliezer.  It looks like they were reading his
> letter when they wrote what they did, especially with regard to his
> objections:

On 6 Feb 00, at 6:16, Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M wrote:

> But, let me ask you, seeing that one major Ashkenazi and one major Sefardi
> posek each declared smoking to be assur, how much impact do you think that
> has? It certainly confirms the self righteousness of us non-smokers :-) ,
> but how many smokers do you think these teshuvos have convinced to quit?

Because when it's one, anyone can say, "he's not my posek," or "I 
didn't ask the shaila." When it's ALL (or almost all) the Gdolim, it's 
a whole different ballgame.

-- 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.

Here is an synopsis of an opinion written by a friend'on homosexuality and 
Jewish law.  His view was that the Torah only condems cult like sex and not 
relations between committed same sex couples.  As I do not agree with his 
position, I would appreciate any comments.    - Larry
****************
The first and perhaps strongest point [of the discussion] is the
fact that Lev. 18:22 and 20:13 refer to misk'vei isha as a toevah, an
abomination.  So I did what Dr. Stanley Gevirtz, (of blessed memory), would
have me do, I checked out the verb sh-k-b in BDB and then looked up all of
the references with its use for sexual contact.  What I found is that in Gen.
26:10, 35:22, Num. 5:12, 19 and Deut. 28:30, sh-k-b is used for adultery.  In
Gen. 34:2, 7, and 2 Sam 13:14, sh-k-b is used for rape.  In I Sam. 2:22, and
Ezek. 23:8, sh-k-b is used for (cultic?) prositution.  In the book of
Leviticus it may or may not have these meanings.  In Lev. 15:24 sh-k-b is
used for intercourse between a man and his menstruating wife.  In Lev. 19:20
sh-k-b is used to describe the case of a man having intercourse with a slave
designated (= engaged) to another man, apparently not yet adultery (?!).
Only in Lev. 15:18 is sh-k-b possibly used in a neutral or positive way, when
it is used for intercourse between a man and his woman.  After the
intercourse described in Lev. 15:18, the man and woman have to bathe in a
mikve and remain unclean until evening.

In Gen. 30:15, Leah has "bought" her night with Jacob with the mandrakes.
This is presented by the biblical author as "prostitution".  Jacob (= Israel,
the enemy of David's Judea) is the prostitute.  And noone says that
prostitutes (or in this case the Jane [a female John]) can't get pregnant.
:-)  Check out the next verse, Leah says to Jacob, "Come in unto me; for I
have hired you with my son's mandrakes."  This was not love making, as it
doesn't say `he knew her', but rather he lay with her.

With the possible exception of Lev. 15:18, the definition of sh-k-b is
adultery, rape and prostitution.  [Lev. 15:18 may also be an unacceptable
sexual contact even between a husband and wife that defiles the two of them.
If this subtext is correct, men were excused from going to the mikve after
each intercourse, not because the guys were lying about the frequency, :-)
but because the law only applied to spousal rape.]

Therefore the toevah in Lev. 18:22 and 20:13 can be 
read as homosexual adultery, rape or cultic prostitution.  The emphasis of
the toevah, abomination, is not who is participating in the sexual act, but
the kind of sexual acts that are destructive to (Jewish) society.  Bottom
line, I honesty believe that the Torah does not condemn homosexuality between
two committed loving equal partners.

I would also argue now that the
use of shakav in the phrase mishkevei isha, is in the Hiphil, i.e. cause to
lie down, or the lying downs of a woman that are caused (= forced).  I am not
talking about lying down for non-sexual reasons.  When one lies down without
a willing partner, or without any partner, it is shakav.
**********************

Since I see Micha has not yet gotten to this, let me ask, pleasethat  
anyone responding to this thread do so off-line. it is completely
inappropriate for our group.

On Sun, 6 Feb 2000 GMAN94@aol.com wrote:

> Here is an synopsis of an opinion written by a friend'on homosexuality
> and Jewish law.  His view was that the Torah only condems cult like sex
> and not relations between committed same sex couples.  As I do not agree
> with his position, I would appreciate any comments.  - Larry
> **************** 


YGB

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

<< They did not. See the Maharsha there. And, if they did, there is something
 very missing in the Rambam Hil. Rotzei'ach u'Shemiras Nefesh 11:5. >>

You obviously haven't done justice to looking up the souces or there would be 
no need for equivication (They did not...And if they did...) The Torah 
Temimah deals with the MaHaRaSHa directly and you can just look up the Be'er 
HaGolah.  Or maybe look at how the Rambam himself cites the pasuk (Rotzeiach 
11:4) - 'Mitzvat aseh l'hasir kol michshol sh-yesh bo mishum sakkanat 
nefashot u'lhishamer b'davar yafeh yafeh ***shene'mar hishamr lecha u'shmor 
nafshecha.***'    Pretty clear that the pasuk is not just referring to idol 
worship.

Maybe I should write an elaborate summary here, but I have too much to do.  I 
can only point out that this issue has nothing to do with Sanhedrin, it has 
nothing to do wuith safek sakkanah, as the surgeon general says smoking is a 
vaday sakkanah - it does have to do with whether you read the pasuk of shmor 
nafhecha as a halachic directive to guard your health, and the sources speak 
for themselves.  Ayen Sham.

<<On Sun, 6 Feb 2000 07:55:29 +0200 "Carl and Adina Sherer"
<sherer@actcom.co.il> writes:
> Here in Eretz Yisroel, my sons (both then in Chorev) started 
> Mishna in second grade and Gemara in fourth. There was a Mishna 
> chug (after school class) in first grade for boys who wanted it. My 
> impression is that this is pretty much across the board except for a 
> few schools that don't start Gemara until fifth, and except for 
> those chadorim that follow literally the shita of the Mishna in Pirkei 
> Avos, which of course start Gemara much later (although I am not sure 
> that they actually wait until 15 for Gemara).>>

	I was referring to chu"l.  I wonder if the difference is due to a
language factor or if the mesorah is different. Do they also not start
with Eilu Metzios?

Gershon

In a message dated 2/6/00 11:11:25 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu writes:

<< Since I see Micha has not yet gotten to this, let me ask, pleasethat  
 anyone responding to this thread do so off-line. it is completely
 inappropriate for our group. >>

Because??
Actually, our group has an obligation to discuss issues that touch on Social, 
Moral, and political, aspects of Torah and society, Especially when it 
involves the use of seemingly legitimate methods to arrive at a conclusion 
clearly at odds with our Mesorah. 

Jordan    

On 6 Feb 00, at 12:13, Gershon Dubin wrote:

> <<On Sun, 6 Feb 2000 07:55:29 +0200 "Carl and Adina Sherer"
> <sherer@actcom.co.il> writes:
> > Here in Eretz Yisroel, my sons (both then in Chorev) started 
> > Mishna in second grade and Gemara in fourth. There was a Mishna 
> > chug (after school class) in first grade for boys who wanted it. My 
> > impression is that this is pretty much across the board except for a 
> > few schools that don't start Gemara until fifth, and except for 
> > those chadorim that follow literally the shita of the Mishna in Pirkei 
> > Avos, which of course start Gemara much later (although I am not sure 
> > that they actually wait until 15 for Gemara).>>
> 
> 	I was referring to chu"l.  I wonder if the difference is due to a
> language factor or if the mesorah is different. Do they also not start
> with Eilu Metzios?

The language factor is probably part of it, certainly with respect to 
Mishnayos.

My sons did in fact learn Eilu Metzios the first year they had 
Gemara. In Mishnayos, the first year they learned Brachos.

-- 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.

Because it entails converastions that are b'geder ein dorshin b'arayos...

If you do not agree, then just do it as a favor to me. Thanks.

On Sun, 6 Feb 2000 TROMBAEDU@aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 2/6/00 11:11:25 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
> sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu writes:
> 
> << Since I see Micha has not yet gotten to this, let me ask, pleasethat  
>  anyone responding to this thread do so off-line. it is completely
>  inappropriate for our group. >>
> 
> Because??
> Actually, our group has an obligation to discuss issues that touch on Social, 
> Moral, and political, aspects of Torah and society, Especially when it 
> involves the use of seemingly legitimate methods to arrive at a conclusion 
> clearly at odds with our Mesorah. 
> 
> Jordan    
> 

YGB

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

I beg your pardon!  There is obviously a difference
between a recitation of empirical fact (or making an
observation that may be subject to debate and varying
interpretions) for the purpose of INTERNAL
SELF-ASSESMENT AND SELF-CRITICISM on the one hand, and
racism on the other.

As a relative newcomer to this list, I am extremely
insulted by the viciousness of this uncalled-for
accusation.

And, by the way, I question whether the reason many of
these people don't exercise is because they don't have
the time or money. Why don't we talk to some of them
and hear their views on health?  Moreover, the lack of
time/money argument has no bearing on (i) why they
smoke; and (ii)why they overeat.  

___________________________________________
It is precisely because I do not agree with such
prejudicial statemts.
Substitute the word "black" for "frum" in your note
and read it back to
yourself.

YGB

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

Right. Until you ask them you do not have the right to criticize them the
way you did.

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

----- Original Message -----
From: Daniel Levine <daniel2121_99@yahoo.com>
To: <avodah@aishdas.org>
Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2000 2:04 PM
Subject: Smoking Ban


> And, by the way, I question whether the reason many of
> these people don't exercise is because they don't have
> the time or money. Why don't we talk to some of them
> and hear their views on health?  Moreover, the lack of
> time/money argument has no bearing on (i) why they
> smoke; and (ii)why they overeat.
>

Thank you for pointing out the sources.

Some more sources: The Minchas Chinuch in Mitzvah 546 (Ma'akeh) discusses
the Rambam at length. The quote from Berachos 32b is clearly an asmachta, as
the ikkar limud, cited from Shavuos 36a, concerns mekalel atzmo (see,
however, Tosafos there vis-a-vis chovel b'atzmo that might be used to
sustain your view). See the Frankel here and in Hil. Sanhedrin (where the
Rambam cites the same pasuk for mekalel) for more sources, which,
unfortunately I do not have at home.

But I do agree with you that this is an interesting sidebar, but irrelevant.
The Rambam and Chinuch et al are all talking about immediate dangers,
derived from ma'akeh, not long term ones.

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

----- Original Message -----
From: <C1A1Brown@aol.com>
To: <avodah@aishdas.org>
Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2000 10:31 AM
Subject: Re: smoking and sakkanah


> << They did not. See the Maharsha there. And, if they did, there is
something
>  very missing in the Rambam Hil. Rotzei'ach u'Shemiras Nefesh 11:5. >>
>
> You obviously haven't done justice to looking up the souces or there would
be
> no need for equivication (They did not...And if they did...) The Torah
> Temimah deals with the MaHaRaSHa directly and you can just look up the
Be'er
> HaGolah.  Or maybe look at how the Rambam himself cites the pasuk
(Rotzeiach
> 11:4) - 'Mitzvat aseh l'hasir kol michshol sh-yesh bo mishum sakkanat
> nefashot u'lhishamer b'davar yafeh yafeh ***shene'mar hishamr lecha
u'shmor
> nafshecha.***'    Pretty clear that the pasuk is not just referring to
idol
> worship.
>
> Maybe I should write an elaborate summary here, but I have too much to do.
I
> can only point out that this issue has nothing to do with Sanhedrin, it
has
> nothing to do wuith safek sakkanah, as the surgeon general says smoking is
a
> vaday sakkanah - it does have to do with whether you read the pasuk of
shmor
> nafhecha as a halachic directive to guard your health, and the sources
speak
> for themselves.  Ayen Sham.
>
>
>
>

I have changed my views on the nature of our discussion group. This is an
open letter to Micha asking that he moderate the list (i.e., screen postings
before they go out to the group).

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

As most often is the case, I find myself agreeing with
Karl's refreshingly clear points.

We cannot underestimate the power of communal social
pressure.  Imagine if a seminary student, even in more
modern circles, were caught smoking--Skilah, Srefah,
Hereg V'Chenek would not suffice for her punsishment!

Why, through social pressure, can't the same taboo
apply to bochurim?

_____________________________________________________
If by "binding authority" you mean that no one could
get malkus for 
it, ain hachi nami. But I think that the strength of
all of the gdolei 
hador forbidding smoking would be one that would cause
social 
pressures which, at least in the world that takes daas
Torah 
seriously, would be difficult to resist. 

- -- Carl


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

 Rashi  23:13 "Through your mouth"

 Do not make a bussiness partnership with a goy were he may swear to you
in the name of his idol  or through your actions he the idols name is
mentioned. Does this mean  I can never be a lawer or take a  gentile to
court since he will have to get up and say I swear to tell the truth....

moti2@juno.com

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


[ 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         ]