Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 470

Wednesday, March 29 2000

• A Pesach Parable: Haggadah as Medicine
• Fwd (micha@aishdas.org): Fwd (skatz@torah.org): HaMaayan / The Torah Spring - Parashat Shemini
• Re: Query: Mishloach Manot from a man to a woman
• Re: cash-msayea
• Re: aniyei ircha
• matza shiurim
• Re: cash-msayea
• Re: Rav Herszog
• "Protocols" book being sold on Amazon and Barnes and Noble
• the pope
• shiurim
• Re: matza shiurim
• Re: shiurim
• Re: shiurim
• Shiurim
• Re: Yissachor-Zevulun Learning Arrangement
• RE: aniyei ircha
• yeshiva 'ectasy'
• RE: yeshiva 'ectasy'
• shiurim
• Re: Chassidim and Drug Laundering. NY Times 3/29/00
• Re: shiurim
• Inquisition
• Re: Chassidim and Drug Laundering. NY Times 3/29/00
• RE: Inquisition

The following is from this week's Hamayan, written by Shlomo Katz
<yitzw@aol.com>. I think it captures the AishDas idea well.

-mi

: The mitzvah of Sippur Yetziat Mitzraim / relating the story of the Exodus
: requires more than just reading the story. One's recitation of the Haggadah
: must be from the heart and also must penetrate one's heart, so that
: the story of the Exodus will serve as the basis for strengthening one's
: emunah/faith. Indeed, R' Simcha Zissel Ziv z"l (the "Alter of Kelm"; died
: 1898) used to observe that the statement in the Haggadah, "The more that one
: relates about the Exodus, the more praiseworthy it is," also can be
: translated, "The more that one relates about the Exodus, the more improved
: he is."

: R' Yaakov Levitt z"l (Bialystok) illustrated with a parable the difference
: between the right way to tell the story of the Exodus and the wrong way:
: 
: A villager once took seriously ill. The doctor was called, and the doctor
: recognized that the villager's illness was fully curable if treated
: properly. He wrote out a prescription and he told the villager's wife,
: "Give your husband this prescription with water three times a day until it
: is finished, and he will be cured."
: 
: The family did as it was told. Every day, the simple village wife tore a
: small piece off the prescription, dissolved it in water and gave it to her
: husband to drink. Needless to say, his condition did not improve.
: 
: The doctor was called, but he was very perplexed. "I know that this
: prescription works," he said. "I have prescribed it for this illness before."
: 
: "Let me see the prescription," he requested finally. "Perhaps I made a
: mistake." The villager's wife explained, however, that she could not show
: him the prescription because she had given it to her husband as instructed.
: 
: "Fools," he shouted. "Can a piece of paper cure your husband's illness? It's
: not the paper that makes the difference, but what's written on the paper
: that would have cured him."
: 
: So it is with the Haggadah. It is not the book of the Haggadah nor simply
: reading the Haggadah which illuminates one's soul. Rather, one must absorb
: the contents of the story. (Haggadah Shel Pesach Sha'arei Armon p. 150)

I mentioned a couple of times that I thought p'shat in the pasuk is more
about ta'am hamitzvah than dinim (which follow derashah). The following is
from the same issue of Hama'ayan as my previous email.

I think it's another instance of this point.

-mi

: "You are to sanctify yourselves and you shall become holy." (11:44)

: The Torah requires certain foods, e.g., terumah and sacrifices, to be eaten in
: a state of taharah / ritual purity. The Midrash Tanna D'vei Eliyahu states:
: from the above verse, Rabban Gamliel learned that, ideally, even food which
: the Torah does not require to be eaten in a state of taharah, nevertheless
: should be eaten in such a state ("Ochel chullin be'taharah").

: R' Yaakov Zvi Mecklenburg z"l (East Prussia; 1785-1865) writes that in light
: of this stringency we can understand another verse in our parashah. We read
: (11:8, regarding non-kosher animals), "You shall not eat of their flesh
: nor shall you touch their carcasses." It appears from this verse that one
: is prohibited from making himself tamei, i.e., bringing ritual impurity
: upon himself, by touching the carcass of an animal that was not "shechted"
: / ritually-slaughtered. In reality, however, there is no such prohibition
: year-round; rather, the Gemara says that this prohibition applies only on
: the festivals, when one is obligated to visit the Bet Hamikdash and will be
: precluded from doing so if he is tamei.

: Why then is the pasuk phrased so generally? Because, answers R' Mecklenburg,
: the verse is alluding to Rabban Gamliel's stringency, i.e., that ideally a
: person should remain tahor / pure all of the time. (Ha'ketav Ve'hakabbalah)

RS Berger wrote:

>>The Ramah in Hilkhot Megilla (OC 695:4) paskens that men should not send 
Mishloach Manot to a single woman (Almanah), lest they come to a possibility of 
Kiddushin. The Mishna Berura (26) explains that it is a concern for Savlonos.>>

The Eshel Avraham (Butchatcher) is medayek from the phrase "ish lere'eihu" that 
it should only be INTRA-gender.

BTW, are you the Shalom Berger from Yerushalayim with a wife named Rachel who 
once taught in Frisch in Paramus, NJ?

Gil Student
gil.student@citicorp.com

In a message dated 3/29/00 9:23:44 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
micha@aishdas.org writes:

<< n Wed, Mar 29, 2000 at 09:14:55AM -0500, Joelirich@aol.com wrote:
 : Does anyone know of any sources regarding the permissability of paying a 
 : merchant in cash if ... they say they won't charge you tax if you pay in 
cash
 
 Sources? Isn't #2 (the text I didn't snip) an open-and-shut case of lifnei
 iver? Dina dimalchusa requires paying sales tax.
 
 -m >>
Why? Could one argue that it's the merchants job to pay the tax, He didn't 
tell me he wasn't paying the tax.

KT
Joel Rich

I wrote:

<<<
Since I gather that no one
interprets the principle of aniyei irkha kodmim so strictly that one 
may not contribute to worthy charities that benefit those outside 
of one's own city, I don't see how the principle of aniyei irkha
kodmim can be used as a justification for negating the 
principle of darkei shalom.  
>>>

Carl Scherer replied:

<<<
I don't think it's a question of a bar on contributing. I think it's a 
question of proportions and priorities. 
>>>

I am happy to agree with you about that.

<<<
I don't think we as individuals 
should contribute to non-Jewish causes, where (a) there are Jewish 
causes that need our funds and (b) our not contributing to the non-
Jewish ones will not cause a chilul Hashem and will not violate 
darchei shalom. IOW, I don't think I am obligated to seek out all 
the poor gentiles in the world when there are over 200 families in 
my neighborhood who need to be given chickens every Shabbos 
(that statistic is true, BTW - someone in the neighborhood hands 
out chickens for Shabbos). And while I might respond favorably to a 
personal approach to donate money to UNICEF (if failure to do so 
would be a chilul Hashem), that does not mean I should be making 
a contribution to UNICEF that is comparable to the (substantial - 
by Israeli standards anyway) amount of money I gave my gabbai 
tzedaka to hand out as matanos la'evyonim on Purim last week. 
Nor does it mean that I cannot just toss (unopened) the UNICEF 
appeal that arrives in my mail.
>>>

Look, we all have to make judgments about how best to use the
scarce resources we have available for charitable contributions.
You have certain criteria in your head and heart that govern
your decisions, and your decisions are not strictly governed by 
the principle of aniyei irkha kodmim.  If you choose not to contribute 
to charities that benefit gentiles unless you are compelled to do so, 
because you would be embarrassed if the gentiles were to find out 
how you really feel about them, I leave that to you and your 
conscience.  But I don't think that you should use the principle of 
aniyei irkha kodmim as a club with which to intimidate those who 
take a broader view of what is entailed by the obligation to give 
charity into following your own sense of "proportions and priorities."  
I am happy that there are those who are giving charity that allows 
families in your neighborhood to enjoy a chicken on Shabbat.  I am 
also happy that there are those who are giving money and taking 
other actions to help save innocent lives in other parts of the world.  
I don't think that anyone who does either needs to apologize for doing 
so.

<<<
I'm sorry but I don't see how a Jew living in Israel (or the US for that 
matter), who fails to respond to a private mail appeal for hunger in 
the Sudan violates darchei shalom where there are Jews around 
the corner who are having trouble putting food on the table. My 
point was that we need to be concerned with fellow Jews before we 
start worrying about the rest of the world. The two are not equal. 
>>>

Again, you have a right to give your charity where you think it will
do the most good.  You don't have the right to tell someone else
that principle of aniyei irkha kodmim means that G-d has told him 
or her that he or she should not give charity to gentiles.  And since 
you brought up the subject, what would you say to R. Meir who 
said that a gentile engaged in the study of Torah (i.e., the seven 
Noahide laws) is(!) equal to a high-priest (and not a kohein gadol 
am-ha-aretz either)?

<<<
I don't think the Rambam ever contemplated the possibility that 
Jews would be donating money to non-Jews halfway around the 
world, nor do I think we are (in most instances) required to do so.
>>>

I am surprised that I would have to remind an attorney that the 
application of a legal principle is not limited to the set of 
circumstances envisioned at the time the principle was first
expounded.

David Glasner
dglasner@ftc.gov

Catav "Newman,Saul Z" <Saul.Z.Newman@kp.org>
 
> most of us have grown up in an era where shiurei seder have been encoded in
> plastic, or some other shiur sheets.   i am curious if people remember
> previous times.  in my mishpacha, this has always created bad wil, since the
> comment is always that the family in europe never  ate shiurim like that,
> but rather a piece of matza more like the size of an olive, or some similar
> small amount. i would like to know if any people out there had minhagim in
> their families of shiurim that were not so voluminous.

Same here.  One year, my wife & I tried for the shiurim, even the Rav na'eh
shiurim, at my parents' seder, and they were rather annoyed.  It's a little
hard to do a full olive-volume of horseradish, anyway - we bulked it up 
with lettuce.

Later, talking with a friend, who said that the whole mania for shiurim
was only about 100 years old, and having read Dr. Soloveitchik's article,
I thought about it, and realized that we were following the customs of
my great-great-grandfather, Jacob Cohen, who had come from Warsaw in about
1870, well before the shiurim mania started.  The next year, we were quite
happy to go back to chips of horseradish and small pieces of matza broken
off the big sheet - mimetic tradition rules.
 
> i would also be curious as to various minhagim of main course at the seder
> meal--  1]   fowl or meat   2]  how cooked

We generally do pot roast one night, and roast turkey the other night.

RJ Rich wrote:

>>Does anyone know of any sources regarding the permissability of paying a 
merchant in cash if 1)they just say they'd prefer cash 2)they say they won't 
charge you tax if you pay in cash>>

R. Hershel Schachter's article is in the first issue of the RJJ Journal (Journal
of Halachah and Contemporary Society) 1981 on Dina Demalchusa Dina.

Gil Student
gil.student@citicorp.com

C/H Luntz wrote:

>>Given that Rav Hertzog's beis din passed takanot to:

a) forbid a father marrying off his minor daughter (a power specifically given 
to the father by the Torah) and>>

Really?  What does he do with the concept made famous by the Taz (but found also
in rishonim) that Chazal cannot forbid anything explicitly permitted by the 
Torah?

Gil Student
gil.student@citicorp.com

As some of you may know, Amazon and Barnes and Noble have both been selling 
the book, "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion," one of the most vicious 
anti-Semitic diatribes ever written.  After receiving protests from the ADL, 
both companies will now prominently place on their website a comment from the 
ADL that the book is an anti-Semitic Czarist forgery.  Furthermore, both 
companies will state that they do not endorse the book's contents or the 
publisher's description, should one appear.  Finally, the book will no longer 
be categorized under "Judaica" but under "World History."

Personally, I'm pleased at this solution--as opposed to banning the book 
altogether.  The idea of banning books, no matter how reprehensible, troubles 
me--and I think both companies exercised corporate responsibility in making 
this decision, and should be applauded.

Any other views on this subject?  I'd be interested in hearing other people's 
opinions...

Michael Feldstein
Stamford, CT

What a wonderful question; but I would not say "you asked good."
kt
steve
Question:  Does the Pope have a status of melech over the Vatican and,
if so,
should one say the berachah upon seeing him?

> Subject: matza shiurim
> 
> most of us have grown up in an era where shiurei seder have been encoded in
> plastic, or some other shiur sheets.   i am curious if people remember
> previous times.  in my mishpacha, this has always created bad wil, since the
> comment is always that the family in europe never  ate shiurim like that,
> but rather a piece of matza more like the size of an olive, or some similar
> small amount. i would like to know if any people out there had minhagim in
> their families of shiurim that were not so voluminous.
> 
> i would also be curious as to various minhagim of main course at the seder
> meal--  1]   fowl or meat   2]  how cooked
> 

In my family and those of our acquaintances the shiur from my childhood
was always
several bitefuls, never the huge shiurim of today. I have heard plenty
of stories
of rabbanim that ate "reasonable" shiurim.
Certainly sefardim follow R. Chaim Naeh.

the meat at the seder is usually chicken

In a message dated 3/29/00 1:40:51 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
jjbaker@panix.com writes:

> We generally do pot roast one night

For further details see S"A Horav O"C 476:4

Kol Tuv

Yitzchok Zirkind

In a message dated 3/29/00 2:47:02 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
turkel@post.tau.ac.il writes:

> the meat at the seder is usually chicken

Just to point out that there are opinions that Simchas Yom Tov must be thru 
meat (see Darkei Tshuvah Y"D 87).

Kol Tuv

Yitzchok Zirkind

I don't think we posken that way.

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila    ygb@aishdas.org

----- Original Message -----
From: <Yzkd@aol.com>
To: <avodah@aishdas.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2000 2:11 PM
Subject: Re: shiurim


> In a message dated 3/29/00 2:47:02 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> turkel@post.tau.ac.il writes:
>
> > the meat at the seder is usually chicken
>
> Just to point out that there are opinions that Simchas Yom Tov must be
thru
> meat (see Darkei Tshuvah Y"D 87).
>
> Kol Tuv
>
> Yitzchok Zirkind
>

Remind me if we discussed this, but since every morsel of matzo on the night
of Pesach is a mitzva d'orysa. why would you not eat as much matzo as
possible, leaving room for the other mitzvos achila and  a seudas Yom Tov?

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila    ygb@aishdas.org

----- Original Message -----
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
To: Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer <sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2000 9:26 AM
Subject: Re: Yissachor-Zevulun Learning Arrangement


> On Sat, Mar 11, 2000 at 09:46:56PM -0600, Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M.
Bechhofer wrote:
> :                     But further thought led me to reconsider, that as by
> : definition all sachar for non-Jews seems to be b'hechrech gemuli, so
there
> : should be some residual similar component by Jews as well.
>
> I don't understand why you make your assumption. Why can't non-Jews have
> sechar seguli? Doesn't the Nefesh haChaim's explanation of the connection
> of mitzvah to sechar apply to the 7 mitzvos B'nei Noach as well?
>

No, I do not think so. The NhC is quite clear that only Jews are hard wired
that way. The whole concept of a chok does not apply to non-Jews for that
reason as well.!

> Along similar lines, Gil Student asked about how acharonim can even
question
> whether non-Jews can do teshuvah.
>

If a compotent of the chiddush of teshuva is the capacity to remove a stain
in olamos elyonim - that would not be relevant to non-Jews, as they neither
stained or ruined nor have what to rectify. So their teshuva would be very
different. It would not be a mending, but a changing.

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila    ygb@aishdas.org

> But I don't think that you should use the principle of
> aniyei irkha kodmim as a club with which to intimidate those who
> take a broader view of what is entailed by the obligation to give
> charity into following your own sense of "proportions and
> priorities."

"aniyei irkha kodmim" is a *halachic* priciple -- and any questions about
how one should distribute one's charity should be discussed with one's LOR.

Following one's "feelings" is *not* a valid method of deciding these matters
(it's impossible not to feel something when you see a picture of a child
starving in Sudan.)


> Again, you have a right to give your charity where you think it will
> do the most good.  You don't have the right to tell someone else
> that principle of aniyei irkha kodmim means that G-d has told him
> or her that he or she should not give charity to gentiles.

No -- but he *did* say to take care of your own community *first*.

Akiva



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

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

please see NYTimes article on fed judge glasser sentencing of the bobover
yungeleit involved in transporting drugs.......

> please see NYTimes article on fed judge glasser sentencing of 
> the bobover
> yungeleit involved in transporting drugs.......

Why? What's the tachlis?

Akiva


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

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

jjbaker asks:
 i would also be curious as to various minhagim of main course at the
seder
> meal--  1]   fowl or meat   2]  how cooked

My wife insists on two meat courses every YT and Shabbat, even when
there are only the two of us.
kt
steve

In today's Times, Judge Leo Glasser sentenced yet another Chassisic garbed 
person for drug smuggling. Judge Glasser was quite critical of a community 
that allowas its youth to be corrupted so easily. Moreover, the Defendant, an 
18 year old mentioned that he grew up in avery religious house without a TV 
or seeing a movie and in a very short period of time he became quite fond of 
drugs. What a Chillul Ha Shem ! Any comments ?
                                              Zeliglaw@aol.com
                                               Steven Brizel

It was asked:


> > i would also be curious as to various minhagim of main course at the seder
> > meal--  1]   fowl or meat   2]  how cooked


Roast lamb. But not a leg.




And Eli Turkel replied:


> Certainly sefardim follow R. Chaim Naeh.
> 


I don't know who R' Naeh is. But I'm looking at 3 different sefarim, and
all are makpid on shiurim, following Maran haShulhan Aruch. Ish Mazliah
(the original), Ben Ish Hai, and Yalkut Yosef. The first two were before
the "shiurim craze". 

Also, R' YGB mentioned that we (you?) don't pasken that simhah requires
basar veyayin. We do. See Yehaveh Da'at V6, # 33. It's too long even to
summarize in my usual form, but briefly... (from his summary) Even in
these days it's a mizvah from the Torah to fulfill the mizvah of
'vesamahta behagecha' by eating meat and drinking wine, unless one
cannot eat meat for health reasons or kashrut, according to the da'at of
the Rambam.

Everyone agrees on this matter, at least in the Sefardi world.


---sam

> Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 23:25:14 -0800 (PST)
> From: ben waxman <benwaxman55@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Inquisition

<<Second the office of the inquisition no longer exists.>>

	I remember hearing that it was only closed fairly recently, 
historical-perspective-wise.  Can someone help with that?

Gershon
gershon.dubin@juno.com

----- Original Message -----
From: <Zeliglaw@aol.com>
To: <avodah@aishdas.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2000 6:47 PM
Subject: Re: Chassidim and Drug Laundering. NY Times 3/29/00


> In today's Times, Judge Leo Glasser sentenced yet another Chassisic garbed
> person for drug smuggling. Judge Glasser was quite critical of a community
> that allowas its youth to be corrupted so easily. Moreover, the Defendant,
an
> 18 year old mentioned that he grew up in avery religious house without a
TV
> or seeing a movie and in a very short period of time he became quite fond
of
> drugs. What a Chillul Ha Shem ! Any comments ?

Yes. That this is not an appropriate topic for Avodah.

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila    ygb@aishdas.org

>
> 	I remember hearing that it was only closed fairly recently,
> historical-perspective-wise.  Can someone help with that?
>
From Brittanica:

In his reorganization of the Roman Curia in 1908, Pius X dropped the word
Inquisition, and the congregation charged with maintaining purity of faith
came to be known officially as the Holy Office. In 1965 Pope Paul VI
reorganized the congregation along more democratic lines and renamed it the
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.



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

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

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


[ 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         ]