Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 472

Thursday, March 30 2000

• R. Ezriel Hildesheimer
• Re: Matzas Mitzva & Simcha
• MO shidduchim
• Re: Chassidim and Drug Laundering. NY Times 3/29/00
• Re: Disciplining Children
• Re: shiurim
• Re: Chassidim and Drug Laundering. NY Times 3/29/00
• Re: Avodah V4 #471
• Re: aniyei ircha
• Re: Disciplining Children
• Re: Disciplining Children
• Re: Disciplining Children
• Re: aniyei ircha
• Re: aniyei ircha
• Re: Disciplining Children
• Re: Disciplining Children
• Re: shiurim
• Re: Matza shiurim

Can anyone recomend a good scholarly biography (in English, I read these
before going to sleep and it's a little difficult to concentrate on
scholarly Hebrew at midnight when I get to read) of R. Ezriel Hildesheimer?
I am particularly interested in his activites during  the period of the
formation of the unified Jewish community in Hungary, and the boycot of the
congress forming that body in 1867, as well as the events leading up to his
departure from Eizenstadt after almost two decades.  Of equal interest to
me, is a comparison between Rabbis Hilsdesheimer, the Maharam Schick and
Hillel Lichtenstein.

It seems that I missed out a very informative post, see Darkei Tshuvah Y"D 89 
(not 87) that discusses the S"A also see Nitei Gavrie-l WRT Seudas Purim 
(from the Leket Yoisher etc.)

Kol Tuv

Yitzchok Zirkind

see gary rosenblatt's column in the Jewish Week [NY] on  shadchanut and MO.
his general observation--- as the communities move further to the right
,there is more pressure to marry earlier, yet also to remove places where
people can meet.  the unwritten secret? the increase in early MO divorce...

Harry Maryles writes reg. Chassidim and Drug Laundering. NY Times 3/29/00 
the following:
"Besides Everyone needs to make a living, right? As long as you only sell 
drugs to Goyim.  They are animals anyway and are probably Michuyiv Misa for 
violating the Shiva Mitzvos Bnei Noah".

I do not know Harry, but I must presuppose that he was saying this 
facetiously.  To make a statement such as 'They are animals anyway and are 
probably Michuyiv Misa for violating the Shiva Mitzvos Bnei Noah' is so 
despicable that it is hard to believe a thinking person could write such a 
statement.

Why not state one of the following:

As long as you only sell drugs to reform/conservative Jews.  They are 
animals anyway and are probably Michuyiv kores  for violating Nida/Chometz 
bepeasach/Shabos/Chelev/Gid HaNesheh, etc.

As long as you only sell drugs to Hasidic Jews.  They are animals anyway and 
are probably Michuyiv misa for violating Zman Kriyas Shma & tefila/Cherem of 
the GR'A, etc.

As long as you only sell drugs to Modern Orthodox. They are animals anyway 
and are probably Michuyiv malkus for violating mixed swimming, not covering 
their hair, tznius, etc.

Harry, please get back to me and let me know you were joking.

Thanks,

/af

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

In Avodah 4#471, CSherer wrote:
> In any event, last week, the psychologist raised the question of
whether one should separate children who are fighting. Every
parenting book that has come out in the last 30 years (at least)
says that you should not get involved in your kids' fights, and that
you have to let them fight it out as long as they are not doing
serious physical harm to each other. All of the women in the group
took that position :-)
> But this psychologist thinks otherwise, and that's what I wanted to raise
with this group....Any thoughts? <
In our bayis-ne'eman efforts, Leah and I aren't far enough
along as yet for me to offer an experiential opinion, but
tuppence I can throw into the ring :-).  There recently was
a thread which dealt with scholastic discipline, and I think
enough sources have been noted on the need for adult
Torah-true Jews to avoid acting like Eisav rather than Ya'akov
whenever and wherever possible -- is it too much of
an extension to posit that, at the least, chinuch responsibilities
require said Jews, in their capacity as parents (or overseers
of any sort), to intervene in disputes which have escalated
from the verbal to the physical?  (Frankly, I'm skeptical that
"every parenting book" advised abstinence in the face of, say,
kids shoving each other, much less a fight of a possibly
more-damaging nature -- perhaps you're confusing staged,
competition-style fighting, which I can see someone advocating
as "healthy," with arguments that escalate into punches?)  Let's
put the shoe on the other foot: are there any Torah sources
which advocate "that you should not get involved in
your kids' fights, and that you have to let them
fight it out as long as they are not doing
serious physical harm to each other"?

All the best from
Michael Poppers * Elizabeth, NJ

I would say that what makes it difficult is the SECOND kezayis of matza that the
mechaber introduces.  Add to that the kezayis for korech and that's a lot of 
matza going down the hatch.

Anyone have a good source for mechaber's extra kezayis?

Gil Student
gil.student@citicorp.com

On 30 Mar 00, at 8:52, Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Harry Maryles <hmaryles@yahoo.com>
> To: <avodah@aishdas.org>
> Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 6:05 AM
> Subject: Re: Chassidim and Drug Laundering. NY Times 3/29/00
> 
> 
> > Perhaps these youngsters would have been benefited by
> > the introduction of TV into their homes.
> >
> 
> What benefit can there possibly be in TV?
> 
> > On second thought, considering the evils portrayed on
> > TV who knows how these young drug smugglers would have
> > been corrupted.
> >
> 
> I am glad that you immediately realized the error of your previous
> paragraph. Absolutely, TV would just make things worse.

From what I have read of the JO's Kids at Risk issue (admittedly 
not much of it - we had to wait for them to order extras in order to 
get one so we just got it recently), I'm not sure there's much of a 
connection between having or not having a TV and the risk of this 
kind of stuff.

From what I understand (and this is mainly based on a talk with 
someone who was visiting from the States two weeks ago), the 
new phenomenon is kids who maintain the outward trappings of 
being fruhm, while getting involved in the drug culture and other anti-
social behavior.

In any event, it's a perplexing and complex problem, and I don't 
think it can be boiled down to something as simple as, "if you have 
a TV you run a risk that your kids will go off the derech; if you don't 
have a TV you don't have a risk." I'm also doubtful that it's a 
problem that we here on Avodah can solve, even with the best of 
intentions.

> > Besides Everyone needs to make a living, right? As
> > long as you only sell drugs to Goyim.  They are
> > animals anyway and are probably Michuyiv Misa for
> > violating the Shiva Mitzvos Bnei Noah.
> >
> >
> 
> I disagree with this statement. 

So do I. I have never heard of anyone given a heter to engage in 
drug dealing based on it being sold "only to the goyim." 

> Can this discussion really have any positive side to it? If so, please
> educate me. If not, move on, please!

I think it can only have a positive side if we refrain from using it as a 
club to bash groups.

-- 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.

I am writing to inquire based on Mr. Sherer's discussion of the parenting class
whether it is permissible for a frum person to learn martial arts when
clearly as part of practice one must hit and be hit. 

I wrote:

<<<
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."
>>>

Akiva Atwood replied:

<<<
"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.
>>>

Darkei shalom is also a halakhic principle, actually I might even call it a
supra-halakhic principle.  Your comment about the proverbial LOR strikes
me as a truism, but to each his own.

<<<
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.)
>>>

I'm not talking about "feelings."  I hate the word "feelings."  I'm talking
about v'asita ha-yashar v'ha-tov.  And I object to the notion that 
aniyei irkha kodmim can trump v'asita ha-yashar v'ha-tov.  I try to avoid 
citing my previous postings as authority, but see my quotation of the Dor 
Revi'i in 4:469 under the subject Golus mentality.
 
I wrote:
<<<
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.
>>>

Akiva repliled:

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

I assume that "he" being uncapitalized refers to Carl Scherer.  
Under that assumption, I would say that since we are warned by 
the Torah "ki lo yehdal he-ani mi-kerev ha-am" your distinction 
strikes me as, well, if you'll pardon my saying so, a tad 
disingenuous.  If "he" was inadvertently uncapitalized, I refer you
back to what I said above.

David Glasner
dglasner@ftc.gov

On 30 Mar 00, at 11:40, MPoppers@kayescholer.com wrote:

> In Avodah 4#471, CSherer wrote:

> > In any event, last week, the psychologist raised the question of
> whether one should separate children who are fighting. Every
> parenting book that has come out in the last 30 years (at least)
> says that you should not get involved in your kids' fights, and that
> you have to let them fight it out as long as they are not doing
> serious physical harm to each other. All of the women in the group
> took that position :-)

> > But this psychologist thinks otherwise, and that's what I wanted to raise
> with this group....Any thoughts? <

 is it too much of
> an extension to posit that, at the least, chinuch responsibilities
> require said Jews, in their capacity as parents (or overseers
> of any sort), to intervene in disputes which have escalated
> from the verbal to the physical?  

In all fairness to the women in our group (including Adina).... The 
claim Dr. Spock and everyone after him makes is that if you 
interfere in the fights you almost inevitably are seen as taking one 
side (and possibly each kid sees you as taking the other's side). 
Therefore they suggest you not intervene unless one child is 
physically hurting the other.

My wife also claims that the two children with whom we interfered 
the most in fighting (you can guess which two :-) are also the two 
who fight the most now (although they have close competition from 
the two younger girls).

(Frankly, I'm skeptical that
> "every parenting book" advised abstinence in the face of, say,
> kids shoving each other, much less a fight of a possibly
> more-damaging nature -- perhaps you're confusing staged,
> competition-style fighting, which I can see someone advocating
> as "healthy," with arguments that escalate into punches?)  

I'm not confusing them at all (I don't think anyway). The books all 
say that if your children are fighting, you should not interfere (Adina 
made me read Dr. Spock when she was expecting our eldest :-).

Let's
> put the shoe on the other foot: are there any Torah sources
> which advocate "that you should not get involved in
> your kids' fights, and that you have to let them
> fight it out as long as they are not doing
> serious physical harm to each other"?

I suppose you could argue that the m'an d'amar who holds katan 
ha'ochel neveilos ain beis din m'tzuvin le'hafrisho would hold that 
way, but AFAIK we don't pasken like that m'an d'amar.

-- Carl


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

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

On Thu, Mar 30, 2000 at 07:08:36PM +0200, Carl M. Sherer wrote:
:                                                                 The 
: claim Dr. Spock and everyone after him makes is that if you 
: interfere in the fights you almost inevitably are seen as taking one 
: side (and possibly each kid sees you as taking the other's side). 

Dr. Spock and mesorah don't see eye-to-eye on many matters. For example, he
doesn't seem to agree with Shelomo haMelech about the dangers of sparing
rods. And yet, I don't think the Me Generation (who were raised in his hayday)
are better off for it.

Not to say I think that discipline equals corporal punishment, hitting too
often robs it of emotional impact and takes it from being a shock to teaching
them to solve too many problems through violence. Nor do I believe that rods
need to be literally used. Please don't call DYFS! However, there are times
for which losing a priviledge or a "time out" are too mild to outweigh the
joys of the issur. Or just too slow -- touching a stove is something you
don't want to work away from gradually.

Dr Spock also is a moral relativist, even down to accepting your kid's
actions if he did them from a personal ethic.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 29-Mar-00: Revi'i, Shmini
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Rosh-Hashanah 16b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         Melachim-II 23

Thanks for your reply.
> The claim Dr. Spock and everyone after him makes is that if you
interfere in the fights you almost inevitably are seen as taking one
side (and possibly each kid sees you as taking the other's side).
Therefore they suggest you not intervene unless one child is
physically hurting the other. <
Chas v'cholilo I should disagree w/ Dr. Spock...besides,
I found his advice re "the 1st year" quite valuable; nevertheless,
I would think there's a happy medium (e.g. "there are good
and bad aspects to intervening in fights -- balance the risks
against the benefits before doing so").  Did the psychologist
you quoted disagree w/ Dr. Spock on a professional basis
or only on a halachic basis?

All the best from
Michael Poppers * Elizabeth, NJ

P.S.  Which title contains Dr. Spock's pearls of wisdom
on the topic of fighting?

While your points are valid, they don't justify spending money from
one's personal tzedoko budget on non-Jewish causes based on emotion or
empathy unless there is a clear halachic reason to do so.

Avrohom Weidberg

R. Micha Berger wrote:
Simple example: if someone had a close relative with some disease, they
might
be moved to give to research foundations that are trying to cure it.
Even
after the choleh's petirah, the person is going to feel a strong kesher
to
that cause.

Someone who lived under the Moslems in Syria might feel strong empathy
toward
Xian slaves in Sudan.

Vechulu...

Your argument could also be applied to other moneys, such as spending
money
to fly to Israel, or to see one's rav/rebbe, or buying a fancy
megillah
case (noi mitzvah for a diRabbanan), etc...

The truth is, there's no indication the same money would otherwise go
to tzedakah. Mitzvos that reach a person emotionally not only get
mitzvah money, they tend to pull more from the luxury budget as well.

- -mi

Edward Weidberg wrote:

<<<
Why would one choose to contribute to goyishe charities (where there's
no aivo or chillul Hashem), where the same money (limited resources) can
be used for specific mitzvas asei  min hatorah of supporting aniyei
yisroel? 
>>>

First of all, your question is not just on me, it is on the Talmud which 
says that darkei shalom require us to give charity to the gentile 
poor as well as to the Jewish poor.  Darkei shalom is not the same 
as mishum eivah, it is v'asita hayashar v'hatov b'einei ha-Shem.
We are required to extinguish a fire in our own house on Shabbat
if we live in a neighborhood where gentiles live mishum eivah.  Darkei
shalom has nothing to do with it, because darkei shalom cannot 
require us to treat gentiles than we would ourselves.  But if we allow
our own houses to burn down and this would endanger the property
of our gentile neighbors who would hold us responsible, then we may 
extinguish the fire to avoid eivah.  However, we are required to 
desecrate the Sabbath to save a gentile's life not mishum eivah, but
because of darkei shalom.  If we are required to desecrate the 
Sabbath to save a Jewish life, then we are required to desecrate the
Sabbath to save a gentile life, even though the specific limud that
allows us to desecrate the Sabbath applies only to Jews, because
the principle of darkei shalom tells us that it cannot be that we 
would desecrate the Sabbath to save a Jewish life, but would not
desecrate the Sabbath to save a gentile life.  v'dok.

Second, why did G-d tell Yonah to go to Ninveh and warn them to
do teshuvah, and why did Yonah disobey?  He disobeyed because
he did not want G-d to draw an invidious comparison between 
Ninveh and the Jews if the people of Ninveh were to do teshuvah 
while the Jews did not.  But G-d insisted that Yonah go to Ninveh to
save it anyway.  Nor was G-d too pleased with Yonah's reaction when
He finally did spare the city.  I suggest that there may actually be a
lesson in that little tale.

Third, gadol ha-adam she-nivra be-tzelem Elokim.  Are you saying
that we have the right to ignore the suffering of such a creature just
because he or she is not Jewish?  

David Glasner
dglasner@ftc.gov

On 30 Mar 00, at 11:29, Micha Berger wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 30, 2000 at 07:08:36PM +0200, Carl M. Sherer wrote:
> :                                                                 The 
> : claim Dr. Spock and everyone after him makes is that if you 
> : interfere in the fights you almost inevitably are seen as taking one 
> : side (and possibly each kid sees you as taking the other's side). 
> 
> Dr. Spock and mesorah don't see eye-to-eye on many matters. For example, he
> doesn't seem to agree with Shelomo haMelech about the dangers of sparing
> rods. And yet, I don't think the Me Generation (who were raised in his hayday)
> are better off for it.

I'm not arguing chas v'shalom that we have to listen to Dr. Spock. 
But there is apparently a long list of child psychologists who agree 
with him on this one.

BTW - IIRC the "Me Generation" is mostly after Dr. Spock's 
heyday. I was raised in his heyday (late 50's and early 60's - by the 
mid to late 60's Dr. Spock was too involved in the anti-war 
movement to be much of a child psychologist at least in terms of 
influence). I think the Me Generation is about ten years younger 
than I am.

> Not to say I think that discipline equals corporal punishment, 

I don't think that was the point. I think the point the psychologist 
we heard was making was to separate the kids when *they* hit by 
putting them in opposite corners or whatever.

-- Carl


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

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

On 30 Mar 00, at 12:31, MPoppers@kayescholer.com wrote:

> 
> Thanks for your reply.
> > The claim Dr. Spock and everyone after him makes is that if you
> interfere in the fights you almost inevitably are seen as taking one
> side (and possibly each kid sees you as taking the other's side).
> Therefore they suggest you not intervene unless one child is
> physically hurting the other. <

> Chas v'cholilo I should disagree w/ Dr. Spock...besides,
> I found his advice re "the 1st year" quite valuable; nevertheless,
> I would think there's a happy medium (e.g. "there are good
> and bad aspects to intervening in fights -- balance the risks
> against the benefits before doing so").  

But the two seem diametrically opposed. Dr. Spock says don't 
interfere at all unless they are hurting each other, and the 
psychologist says that al pi halacha you must interfere the 
moment one strikes the other. So as halachic people, if we strike a 
balance, we are violating halacha.

Did the psychologist
> you quoted disagree w/ Dr. Spock on a professional basis
> or only on a halachic basis?

He didn't address it on a professional basis. He said, "this is the 
halacha so forget all your child-rearing books." It almost goes 
without saying that most of the men have never read any child-
rearing books....

> P.S.  Which title contains Dr. Spock's pearls of wisdom
> on the topic of fighting?

I think the original child care book.

Just to throw another ringer into this....

We have Miriam Levi ("Effective Jewish Parenting") giving a child-
rearing class in our house these days (for women - I either come 
home before it starts and hide in the den or stay in the office until 
after it ends :-). Miriam Levi bases herself on R. Simcha 
Wasserman zt"l. Adina has the impression that R. Simcha doesn't 
hold the way this psychologist does....

-- 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.

Eli Turkel wrote:


> R. Chaim Naeh lived in Yerushalayim some 70 years ago.

Thank you.

I'm looking in Yehaveh Da'at V1, #16, and I should have read it through
before I said I didn't know who R' Avraham Hayyim Naeh was. The author
of Shiurei Torah.


> 
> As I mentioned seperately most of the old data seems to also support
> R. Chaim Naeh. Also as the smallest of the popular shiurim it kends
> itself to being more reasnable in terms of ones usual eating habits.


Smallest how? An egg is a revi'it and a half according to the Rif
(Pesahim perek 10, pg109a). The Rambam (pirush mishnayot Ediot 1:2)
writes that a Revi'it is 27 darham of water. So an egg would be 18
darham, as agreed by the Bet David, the Hida, Ben Ish Hai, and others.
The only argument I know of is whether there are two or three zetim in
an egg (the Peri Hadash brings the Rambam and the Gemara (Eruvin 80a)
that the shiur of an eruv is 18 gerogrot, which is six eggs. A grogeret
is larger than a kezayit (Shabbat 90a), which would make an egg larger
than 3 zetim. Tosafot (Hullin 103b) says mamash that an egg is two
zetim, which was the opinion of R' Yonah. This is supported by sefer
Hemdat Yamim, who brings the mahloket, and says that the olam is noheg
like R'Y. I've left out a few, but in the end we've got a nice array of
gedolim on both sides. Maran brings only the opinion of R"Y.), which
means there would be either 6 or 9 darham in a kezayit. The Ozzer
Hatefillot (after Shabbat Musaf) defines a darham as 3.2 grams. R' Naeh
(as quoted by R' Ovadiah) says it's two zetim to an egg, which makes 9
darham, or 28 grams (about an ounce). R' Ovadiah says we pasken that way
for mazzah since it's de'oraitah, but since maror is medivrei sofrim we
can go according to the Rambam that there are three zetim to an egg, or
6 darham/18.4 grams to an olive, and that's how much maror we eat
lema'aseh, unless you wish to cover all de'ot, which you are welcome to
do, even for a de'rabbanan.


Do others define a darham differently?


---sam

"Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer" wrote:


> A kezayis is meaningless unless eaten toch kedei achilas pras. this is true


Not meaningless. According to the Maharil, eating it bit by bit k'derech
achilah is OK even lechat'hilah. We don't hold that way, but for one who
is unable to eat it in the allotted time, they'd still be yozzei
bede'avad. Actually, I think we're stricter than you, trying for under 4
minutes. You hold nine, yes?


> BTW, will the fire in a BP Matzo factory yesterday affect matzo prices this
> year?


What's BP? Not British Petroleum, I hope?


---sam

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


[ 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         ]