Avodah Mailing List
Volume 04 : Number 481
Wednesday, April 5 2000
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 22:55:24 EDT
From: Tobrr111@aol.com
Subject: Dor Rivii and Satmar Rav
I really have a lot more to say about the Dor Rivii, but I will not continue
being that it seems that I somehow gave the impression that I was "insulting"
him. Being that I chas Vshalom do not want to do so, I am hesitant to
continue this thread. I had thought that it I was speaking respectfully (as
David noted) but in case I wasn't I want to ask mechila from the Dor Rivii
and his distinguished descendant. The excellent article I had referred to in
a previous post was written by our very own David Glasner, and I thank him
for introducing me to the Dor Rivii's thought. After reading the article I
went thru most of the Dor Rivii's seforim and read and spoke to people about
him and I must admit that I find him fascinating. However, I have many
thoughts and comments on his writings -- some of which I mentioned here.
That doesn't change the fact that i consider him to be a gadol and Tzadik as
I clearly wrote. R. Moshe Feinstein writes that "sefifosav dovivos Bkever" is
when you mention a gadol's Torah even if you argue on it. In that way I hope
the Dor Rivii would be happy with me mentioning his Torah.
One final thought with regard to the Satmar Rav. While we are being very
careful not to put the Dor Rivii outside the Pale (which I never at all
wanted to do), I am not certain why the Satmar Rav and his thought doesn't
deserve the same consideration. I, no less than David, find aspects of his
thought to be a "gevalt." But let's not forgot that we are talking about a
great Talmid Chacham, highly respected by many more "mainstream" gedolei
Yisrael, who has tens of thousands of followers, who fully believe and agree
with his shitos. Even RYBS mentioned him respectfully. Just because we
completely disagree with his thought, can it really be said that anything he
said is beyond the Pale of Orthodox thought and opinion?
Go to top.
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 23:14:35 -0400
From: sambo@charm.net
Subject: Re: matza shiurim
Micha Berger wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 04, 2000 at 09:44:19AM -0400, Sammy Ominsky wrote:
> : So why insist on defining it by area filled instead of by weight? Weight
> : will be consistent across all your measuring schemes.
>
> RYGB addressed this already: a k'zayis is a unit volume.
>
Have you any sources for this? It seems to be common knowledge, but
everything I have indicates weight. I even found a chart I had hand
copied into the back of one of my gemaras (Kiddushin, if you're keeping
track) from a million years ago. It's directly from R' Naeh's sefer
(which I obviously had accesss to then, even though I don't remember
it), and all the measurements are in weights; A kur= 10 eifot= 166.6 kg,
an eifah= 3 sa'in= 16.66 kg, a sah= 6 kavin= 5.55 kg, a kav= 4 lugim=
0.925 kg, a lug= 4 revi'ot= 0.23 kg, a revi'it= 1.5 bezzah in the shell=
86.4 g, a bezzah= 57.6 g, a zayit= 0.5 bezzah= 28.8 g (and I have
written in parentheses; vezeh lehumrah al davar shehu min haTorah.
Kegon: kezayit mazzah beleil Pesah) V'yesh mesharim 25.6 g. he has a
grogeret as a third of a bezzah= 19.2 g.
The post the other day was a summary of R' Ovadiah's work, not my own
hiddush.
HaHagadah Hameduyeket Ish Mazliah says 30 g.
> To enlarge on his words... It seems like you're losing sight of the fact that
> this is a general rule: achilah is defined as eating a solid the volume of a
> k'zayis in the time of k'dei achilas p'ras. This is true whether the din is
> matza or Yom Kippur, whether the food weighs as much as a k'zayis of egg yolk
> or as little as one of celery.
Where is this general rule stated? I can't lose sight of something I've
never seen.
>
> You might be able to say that one k'zayis of *matza* weighs approximately 27g.
It should. And according to R' Naeh, as copied into the back of my
gemara, so does a kezayit of everything else.
> By you and your kehillah. Us American Ashkenazim never "generally accepted"
> any one measure. Personally, I tend to use R' Moshe's 18.25" amma.
R' Naeh has 48 cm for an amma, if you were curious.
> I therefore have no idea what was meant by the post that gave a k'zayis in
> grams. Unless R' Naeh actually did all of the above, and was being specific
> about matzah.
According to my notes (I don't have the sefer, but I'm going to try to
get a copy) he was specifying the weight of a kezayit, and used mazzah
as an example, not the other way 'round.
> Air has mass, and a full balloon weighs more than an empty one. The crumbled
> version may include more or less air than the non-crumbled one, depending
> on packing.
Yes, but lema'aseh, the amount of air held in the pockets of mazzah is
negligible.
---sam
Go to top.
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 22:55:59 -0400
From: Gershon Dubin <gershon.dubin@juno.com>
Subject: Ruchani Eye on Rabbi Ovadaih Yosef, shlita
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 14:07:55 -0400
From: "Daniel B. Schwartz" <SCHWARTZESQ@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject: Re: Ruchani Eye on Rabbi Ovadaih Yosef, shlita
<<The politcal fallout aside, I have one very basic question; are Rabbis,
no
> matter how great in stature, above the law?>>
Is Yossi Sarid and the other dati haters above the law in their
incitement? Have you read any of the sewage that issues from them
concerning datiim?
Is the Arab MK who encouraged terrorism, Hizbolla style, above the
law?
Or is only a Rav subject to the law?
It is well known that this particular law is invoked by the
establishment against those with whom they disagree. Should this prevent
a gadol beYisrael and a recognized manhig from expressing his views?
<<Was there a Halachik mandate for ROY to speak as he did? Was there no
other way, (i.e. one which would not have resulted in this
investigation/new culturkampf) for him to have expressed his views?>>
The halachic mandate was obviously determined by ROY himself. He is not
a katla kanya who needs our haskama, but certainly the fight for
continuation of control of chinuch in the hands of the rabbanim and not
the anti dat misrad hadatot is worth the battle. In case you haven't
been watching, it is not Rav Yosef who declared war against the
Meretzniks, it is the opposite.
(Note: I am not in any way condoning fraud or mishandling of public
funds. If this is found to be the case in the Shas system, it should be
rooted out. But the opposition to Shas by Sarid is clearly not based on
the supposed violations of the public trust. He has a very defined anti
dati agenda.)
<<If we will defend ROY simpy on the grounds that he is a gadol beYisrael
and for no other reason, then we are then treading precariously down a
slippery slope.>>
You are absolutely correct. __Anybody__ who takes it upon himself to
speak out against the travesties being perpetrated upon the Torah should
also be defended. Would you have censured Pinchas and had him tried by
Zimri's chaverim?
<<Shall we then defend and stand by those most admirable mosdos,
operating with the haskama of gedolim that commit tax fraud? Shall we
signal our approval for those thugs who kidnap and beat men who do not
give their wives gittin (and do so at the behest of batei din and
dayanim)?>>
This odious comparison does no justice to your argument.
Gershon
gershon.dubin@juno.com
Go to top.
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 02:51:29 EDT
From: JoshHoff@aol.com
Subject: Re: Avodah V4 #480-R.Ovadia Yosef
In a message dated 00-04-04 20:42:33 EDT, you write:
<<
> Maybe Rav Ovadiah's comments were harsh and maybe they were not! What he
> said was clearly within the realms of Halakha. This is evident from
anyone
> studying the Laws of Lashon HaRa from the Sefer Hafetz Haim.
>
>>
R.Ovadia Yosef is one of the premier poskei hador.I don't thnk he needs any
of us to be say whether his actions conform to halacha.
Go to top.
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 02:59:22 EDT
From: YosGold@aol.com
Subject: (no subject)
On Sunday, April 9th at 1PM there will be a massive rally of tefilla and
music for an eternally undivided Jerusalem. As I was organizing this event, I
learnt innumerable lessons about human nature and our communities' mentality
with regard to being able to participate in history rather than being a
spectator.
I am not the head of a major Jewish organization. I have no secretary nor
super-sunday fundraising money--I don't even have a fax machine. I am a
University student who listened to his Rabbi practically beg his classmates
to do something about the situation in Israel, and was stung by the deafening
silence.
I am a student who has read the pages beyond the headlines in the newspapers.
I have seen that while an undivided Jerusalem used to be a non-issue, this is
no longer the case. Its division, masked in terms such as "a redrawing of
boundaries", is going unnoticed, only to be presented to us in a couple of
months as a done deal.
Contrary to popular belief, we can make a difference. Thousands of Jews
reciting Tehillim and singing songs of Yerushalayim is guaranteed to make an
enormous impression on two planes: It will shake the heavens with our prayers
for a true peace in Eretz Yisrael, and let the world know that Jerusalem is a
part of each and every one of us, not to be amputated in an attempt to
momentarily ease the pain.
The thousands of Jews who will proudly fill Dag Hammersjkold Plaza (47th
between 1st & 2nd Ave.) by the United Nations on Sunday will leave there with
a feeling that has vanished in recent years. It is the feeling that every Jew
felt clearly in his heart during the days following the six-day-war. That
same feeling of realization - that Eretz Yisrael is THE focal point and
source of life to our generation- that began to fade as the weeks passed. The
life has been sucked out of us. We watch Israel's future fly past us on CNN
and lament the government's decisions, while not raising a finger to
influence them.
What pained me the most during the preperations for this rally was the
solemnly toned response I heard so often from community members and Rabbis
alike: "You know I can't support this or publicize it unless you have major
organizations behind you." Have we come to a point where we cannot decide
whether or not to support a position unless it is endorsed by an
organization? Is truth a commodity solely possessed by the OU and Agudas
Yisrael? These highly politicized organizations somehow are qualified enough
to make us reliant on them to tell us whether or not it's necessary to gather
and say Tehillim? In any event, Rav Aaron Soloveichik, Rav Moshe Dovid
Tendler, Rav Hershel Shachter and other Roshei Yeshiva signed statements
strongly urging attendance on Sunday. Rav Shachter and Rav Tendler will be
among the speakers.
With G-d's help, on Sunday, April 9th, we will cry out the words of David
HaMelech. We will remind the world and ourselves that the city of Jerusalem
is above politics. The holy city where our Beit Hamikdash used to stand; to
which we used to gravitate three times every year, has the unique ability to
invigorate one's soul and fill him or her with a sense of life. We will stand
together and recite the Tehillim of David Hamelech who wrote them as he gazed
upon the hills of our holy city. Please make every effort to join us.
Rally of Prayer and Song
Eternally Undivided Jerusalem
Sunday April 9th
1:00 PM sharp
Dag Hammarskjold Plaza near the UN
47th (between 1st and 2nd Ave.)
Be among thousands of your brothers and sister as we raise our voices in
prayer and song for a true, just peace in the Holy Land.
feel free to bring musical instruments
call Ezra @ 212 543 9447 (Adrockdust@aol.com)
or Yosef @ 212 740 5996 (YosGold@aol.com)
for further information
Go to top.
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 12:15:23 +0200 (IST)
From: Eli Turkel <turkel@math.tau.ac.il>
Subject: Gebrochts
>
> Friday night, there was a sheet of paper left on benches in shul
> which made the claim that because of the way the matzos are
> made (which, he argued, is in layers) there is a greater chashash
> of chimutz than in the past, that the ovens are not hot enough, and
> that therefore there is a greater basis for keeping gebroks. Did
> anyone else see this? Anyone out there who gives (or has given)
> hashgacha on a matzo factory?
That is argument for the matzah to be chametz!
The difficult part of Gebrochts is that if there this a problem that
it might be chametz even without adding extra water later.
After all it was originally mized with water and if not fully baked then
it turns into chametz or else at least chamertz nukshe.
What does mixing it with soup later do more?
Eli Turkel
Go to top.
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 06:51:43 -0500
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
Subject: Re: Ruchani Eye on Rabbi Ovadaih Yosef, shlita
Daniel B. Schwartz <SCHWARTZESQ@WORLDNET.ATT.NET> asked:
:> The politcal fallout aside, I have one very basic question; are Rabbis, no
:> matter how great in stature, above the law?>>
You interrupted a discussion of whether R' Ovadia's words were ethical with
one of whether they are legal. While I don't know Israeli law, it seems that
if there is a law prohibiting this kind of hyperbole, it is very unevenly
applied. As has been pointed out by others.
Aside from that, Israeli law is off topic for Avodah.
:> Was there a Halachik mandate for ROY to speak as he did? Was there no
:> other way, (i.e. one which would not have resulted in this
:> investigation/new culturkampf) for him to have expressed his views?
*New* culturkapf? What do you call the act he was responding to -- putting
an antisemite's poetic diatribes into the Israeli Jewish curriculum? It's
just a new volley, and a symptom of the media as to which side got the worse
press. BTW, try getting Ibn Grairol into the syllabus.
R' Ovadia is both Sepharadi and percieved as Chareidi. As such, he is in
two classes against which the Israeli media has well established itself as
being prejudicial. That is why you read about outrage over his comments,
but not over Darwish y"sh's poetry.
(BTW, a real example of galus mentality: teaching Jewish kids to hate
themselves and their people by holding up antisemites who call for genocide
as role models.)
In Gershon Dubin's reply, he comments:
: The halachic mandate was obviously determined by ROY himself. He is not
: a katla kanya who needs our haskama...
This is an important point. R' Ovadia is the *source* of much of contemporary
"halachic mandate".
Halachah's effect, among others, is to ennoble its followers. And halachah
is not created by scholars, by people who know Torah objectively; but by
da'as Torah, people who live and feel and have learned to think and intuit
by the Torah's words.
It would therefore be surprising to most of Avodah's readership to learn that
a successful poseik acted in a manner that was ignoble. Not impossible, surely,
but unlikely. The level of evidence necessary to convince us would be high.
So far I've heard a number of explanations: such diatribes are part of the
Israeli political scene and is the only way to make a point heard in that
environment; that R' Ovadia was acting in the age-old Sepharadi role as
mochiach, not as a rav, and that his speech was typical of this genre; etc...
The truth is, none of them are necessary. I think that expressing anger at
someone bringing in something sure to encourage religious, cultural, and
genetic assimilation by devaluing Jewish identity to our next generation
is appropriate.
That a Jew would do so, outrageous. It doesn't even require halachic awareness,
it's prima facie absurd. Picture a Southern Black church teaching the works of
David Duke y"sh as an example of "the suffering they caused whites". Reality
has outpaced the Chelm story.
The fact that his speech was taken as a call-to-arms? Funny how only those for
whom such an interpretation (even those whose own mouths spoke of exterminating
"those lice") would serve their own political ends saw it as such.
Back to Daniel's diatribe (sorry, the alliteration was too inviting):
:> Shall we then defend and stand by those most admirable mosdos,
:> operating with the haskama of gedolim that commit tax fraud? ...
I don't know of a single person who is even viewed as a gadol by anyone other
than themselves (a more objective criterion than determining who actually
is one) who advised committing tax fraud. As per above, that's not how the
halachic mind (if you prefer that term to "da'as Torah") works.
:> signal our approval for those thugs who kidnap and beat men who do not
:> give their wives gittin (and do so at the behest of batei din and
:> dayanim)?
Well, we all know the gap between many dayanim and gedolei Torah. Let's not get
back to that issue. Aside from that, I have only tangential objections in the
case of doing so in chutz la'aretz. I think the guy deserves a good beating;
it's far less damaging than what he would otherwise continue doing to his wife.
-mi
--
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287 MMG"H for 4-Apr-00: Shelishi, Sazria
micha@aishdas.org A"H
http://www.aishdas.org Rosh-Hashanah 19b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.
Go to top.
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 08:19:02 EDT
From: Joelirich@aol.com
Subject: Re: Ruchani Eye on Rabbi Ovadaih Yosef, shlita
In a message dated 4/5/00 7:52:18 AM Eastern Daylight Time, micha@aishdas.org
writes:
<<
So far I've heard a number of explanations: such diatribes are part of the
Israeli political scene and is the only way to make a point heard in that
environment; that R' Ovadia was acting in the age-old Sepharadi role as
mochiach, not as a rav, and that his speech was typical of this genre; etc...
The truth is, none of them are necessary. I think that expressing anger at
someone bringing in something sure to encourage religious, cultural, and
genetic assimilation by devaluing Jewish identity to our next generation
is appropriate. >>
As I wrote earlier (and maybe this has already happened and I'm not aware of
it), I think it would be helpful to many individuals' tora growth, and avoid
a lot of misinterpretation and misapplication, if ROY(given his encyclopedic
knowledge as evidenced in his shut) would simply explain the halakhic
principles and factual events that led to his "psak" to make statements that,
to the untutored eye, seem inconsistent with certain halakhic norms.
Kol Tuv,
Joel Rich
Go to top.
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 14:22:28 +0200
From: "Carl M. Sherer" <cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il>
Subject: Re: Ruchani Eye on Rabbi Ovadaih Yosef, shlita
I am a little reluctant to respond to this, because I fear that some
people may take my words as dibat ha'aretz (and in fact I have
already deleted one paragraph in the hopes of avoiding that
problem). But in order to be mekaneh la'emes and to defend a
Gadol baTorah, I think it is important to respond to this....
V'Hashem yishmereini she'lo ekashel b'dvar mitzva....
On 4 Apr 00, at 14:07, Daniel B. Schwartz wrote:
>
> The politcal fallout aside, I have one very basic question; are
> Rabbis, no matter how great in stature, above the law?
Does the law have to be obeyed in all circumstances? Think about
some of the civil rights demonstrations in the south in the 60's
before you answer that question.
What if the law is applied unevenly?
What makes you think that if RAN had said the things he did on a
satellite hookup, rather than in a closed Beis Medrash, with a
limited post-sicha publication over the net, that he would NOT have
been "investigated." Do you think that if Rav Nebenzahl were the
"spiritual leader" of the third largest political party in the country
and said the things he said in that sicha, that he would not have
been "investigated?" Do you think that if Rav Nebenzahl were as
well known as Rav Ovadia (as - BTW - he may well be twenty
years from now IY"H, because the man is a Gadol baTorah), that
he would not have been "investigated?" Does that mean that RAN
is pretending to be "above the law?" (Before you answer that
question, I think it is important to point out that Rav Nebenzahl's
father was the comptroller of the State of Israel twenty years ago,
and therefore he cannot simply be dismissed as "anti-State" or
"anti-Zionist." Rav Nebenzahl's sichot are delivered at Yeshivat
HaKotel, which is a hesder Yeshiva).
Was there a
> Halachik mandate for ROY to speak as he did?
I think that's for him to determine and not for us. To whom do you
suggest that he pose the shaila?
Was there no other way,
> (i.e. one which would not have resulted in this investigation/new
> culturkampf) for him to have expressed his views?
I don't think it's a question of his need to express his views - I think
it's a question of his seeking any way to wrest control of the
Charedi education system's finances from an ocher Yisrael.
Besides, the question of how ROY choses to express his views is
not subject to the constitutional scrutiny of American civil rights
cases, and there is no moral (certainly) or legal (maybe)
requirement that he choose to express his views in the least
offensive (to the chiloni public) manner.
If we will defend
> ROY simpy on the grounds that he is a gadol beYisrael and for no other
> reason, then we are then treading precariously down a slippery slope.
> Shall we then defend and stand by those most admirable mosdos,
> operating with the haskama of gedolim that commit tax fraud?
One has nothing to do with the other as RGD has already pointed
out.
I think that what RYGB was getting at in posting the Sicha is that it
is very difficult to evaluate situations in Eretz Yisrael without first
hand knowledge, and if a Gadol baTorah with first hand knowledge
says the things that ROY or RAN have said about the situation, all
of us must take notice.
-- 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.
Go to top.
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 14:22:29 +0200
From: "Carl M. Sherer" <cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il>
Subject: Re: Ruchani Eye on Rabbi Ovadaih Yosef, shlita
On 4 Apr 00, at 14:56, Joelirich@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 4/4/00 2:28:19 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> SCHWARTZESQ@WORLDNET.ATT.NET writes:
>
> << If ROY, a citizen of Israel, broke the law by means of what he
> said, then he should answer for it. I think that "Chachamim hizharu
> bedivreichem. . ." is ever appropos. >>
> I would certainly learn a lot from an explanation of why ROY felt his
> approach was correct.
It is hard to do more than speculate about that. But let's put some
facts on the table:
1. With the exception of the Rabin government in 1992, the last
several education ministers have come from either Shas or Mafdal.
2. The only other education minister who attempted to take control
of the Charedi school system - until the present government - was
Shulamit Aloni. Shas eventually succeeded in forcing her out (her
replacement - Amnon Rubinstein - was from Meretz, but he allowed
the Charedi school system autonomy).
3. The current education minister is Yossi Sarid from Meretz. One
of his assistants - Meshulam Nahari - is from Shas, and under the
coalition agreement, he is to exercise control over the Charedi
school systems. Shas is the second largest party in the coalition
(17 MK's). Meretz has 10.
4. Sarid has not let Nahari do anything other than sit in his office
since the government began to function.
5. Sarid has withheld money that was approved by the government
from the Shas school system, even *after* Shas complied with his
demands for reform in its school system.
6. The points of contention that are on the table between Shas and
Sarid with respect to the Shas school system are the very points
that make the Shas school system attractive to *chilonim* who
may want to send their children there and give them a religious
education they might not otherwise get. Those points include
advantages that ought to be clear to our American bretheren -
smaller class sizes, hot lunch programs, free transportation and so
on. The real battle is over whether children of chilonim (especially
traditional but not "fruhm" Sephardim) will educate their children in
the Mamlachti (secular public schools) in which they will learn the
poetry of Mohamed Darwish, or whether they will educate their
children in fruhm schools where they will learn Mishna and Gemara
and other (R"L from the term) "useless" topics.
7. The only reason the Shas school system has not shut down is
that the mechanchim are truly le'shem Shamayim and therefore
they have been working without receiving salaries for months.
8. Neither Shas nor Meretz wants to be seen as backing down on
this issue - Shas because as the second largest party in the
coalition, it should be receiving better treatment, and Meretz
because Shinui (Tommy Lapid's racist party) is breathing down its
neck for votes (Shinui has 6 MK's and refused outright to go into
any coalition in which Shas would be a member).
To put this into a perspective that some of you may understand,
think about the reasons the Netziv closed the Volozhener Yeshiva
and imagine a "Jewish" Israeli government playing the role of the
Russian government.
Hashem Yishmereinu!
-- 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.
Go to top.
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 09:45:44 -0400
From: "Rayman, Mark" <mrayman@lehman.com>
Subject: The Taz and Milah
I have seen he Taz, but I do not remember the source off hand.
However, I do recall that MV"R Rav Shlomo Wahrman points out a few "counter"
examples:
Kesem: Although we darshen "dam velo kesem", miderabanan we are machmir on
kesamim
Nevaila: Although the Torah says "o machor lanochri" there are issurei
derabanan involved in selling non-kosher meat (sorry no sources).
Ma'aseh shabbos: although we darshen (lehalakha) "kodesh hi lachem - hi velo
ma'aseha" (something like that)
ma'aseh shabbos are assur miderabanan.
There were many more examples. I'll try and dig up some more. Maybe
kilayim betziztis (min hatorah we darshen semucim, but we are gozer mishum
ksus layla), is also an example.
Moshe
Go to top.
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 08:59:33 -0500
From: "Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer" <sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>
Subject: Re: Ruchani Eye on Rabbi Ovadaih Yosef, shlita
----- Original Message -----
From: Carl M. Sherer <cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il>
> I think that what RYGB was getting at in posting the Sicha is that it
> is very difficult to evaluate situations in Eretz Yisrael without first
> hand knowledge, and if a Gadol baTorah with first hand knowledge
> says the things that ROY or RAN have said about the situation, all
> of us must take notice.
>
Absolutely on target.
Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila ygb@aishdas.org
Go to top.
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 09:28:28 -0500
From: "Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer" <sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>
Subject: Re: Yissachor-Zevulun Learning Arrangement
I was never medayek his quote of a pasuk! You may be right, but, yes, one
could differentiate between mitzva and aveira, as sheva mitzvos bnei Noach
are not "chukim".
Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila ygb@aishdas.org
----- Original Message -----
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
To: <avodah@aishdas.org>
Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2000 9:24 AM
Subject: Re: Yissachor-Zevulun Learning Arrangement
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2000 at 02:22:49PM -0600, Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M.
Bechhofer wrote:
> :> 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.!
>
> I understood differently, and refrained from responding until chechking
the
> NhC again. My impression is that he doesn't feel that non-Jews make the
> same roshem in the olamos ha'elyonim (*), see 1:4 about Nevuchadnetzar and
> Titus. However, I also took him to understand the acts of non-Jews to
> produce their own olam habah. In 1:11 R' Chaim speaks of "kol Yisrael
> yeish lahem cheilek li'olam habah" as a guarantee that only Jews have --
> not that a non-Jew wouldn't. His examples of people who create their own
> gehenom include Yermiyahu (2:19) speaking to Mitzrayim and Ashur.
>
> So it would seem that non-Jews do have a seguli relationship with their
> fates. Or do you believe this to be true of cheit but not mitzvah?
>
> *) It is interesting to note that the NhC takes this as an ontological
> statement: that nachriim lack that connection to olamos ha'elyonim. RSRH
> makes it an axological one: we are obligated to develop that connection
> but they are not. See his commentary on Bamidbar 16:41. This is why 8,
> which is beyond the week, is associated with milah, atzeres and tzitzis
> -- the calling of the Jew.
>
>
>
> -mi
>
> --
> Micha Berger (973) 916-0287 MMG"H for 4-Apr-00: Shelishi, Sazria
> micha@aishdas.org A"H
> http://www.aishdas.org Rosh-Hashanah
19b
> For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.
>
Go to top.
*********************
[ 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 ]