Avodah Mailing List

Volume 06 : Number 077

Friday, December 22 2000

• Re: Rashi question
• Re: Halachic History and Halachic Process
• Purim and Chalitza
• RE: Tamar and Aishes Potifar
• Pirke d'Rabbenu Hakadosh
• Re: Pirke d'Rabbenu Hakadosh
• Re: Pirke d'Rabbenu Hakadosh
• Re: Pirke d'Rabbenu Hakadosh
• Great Meshech Chochmo on the last mishna in Nazir!
• Re: Great Meshech Chochmo on the last mishna in Nazir!
• Chanukah isn't a Chag
• Re: shelayom variants
• Re: Electric menorahs
• Re: An Onen on Chanukah
• Re: Dor Revi'i and the TSBP
• Re: (Fwd) Tfillin on Chol HaMoed (was Minhag Avoteynu Beyadeinu)
• hair covering
• Re: missing letters
• hillul hashem defined by Goyim or Jews
• RE: Purim and Chalitza
• RE: Avraham and Kiruv
• RE: Avraham and Kiruv
• RE: Avraham and Kiruv
• Re: Avraham and Kiruv
• Re: Avraham and Kiruv
• Re: Avraham and Kiruv
• Re: Avraham and Kiruv
• Avraham and Kiruv
• Re: Cholov Yisrael and Chabad
• RE: Cholov Yisrael and Chabad

In Avodah V6 #75, GDubin writes:
> Rashi in vayeshev explains, during Yosef's interpretation of the
> sar hamashkim's dream, that "yisa Faro es roshecha" means that he will
> count you in the number of servants. Then, when it actually happens,
> Rashi gives what is apparently the same explanation. Why?

I think the key to the answer is at the end of that second comment by
RaShY: "...c'mo 'S'u es rosh...' - lashon minyan." He's setting forth
a rule ("lisa es rosh" means "to count" or "to consider as part of a
group") and he does refer to it in a number of places (much as he does
with other k'lalim, e.g. haih basof = lamed bat'chila). (NB that the
phrase in 40:19 is _not_ the same type of phrase, although the similarity
is intentionally striking.)

All the best (including wishes for a great Shabbos and a wonderful
Chanukah week) from
Michael Poppers * Elizabeth, NJ

On Thu, Dec 21, 2000 at 12:08:12PM -0500, Wolpoe, Richard wrote:
:> the Rashbam ...    even suggests that Rashi is necessarily incomplete,
:> since each day Rashi would have had to have written a totally different
:> kuntrus.
...
: And even Rashi himself frequently gives various angles. Certainly the
: idea and format of a Mikraos Gedolos is to subbest that each passuk has
: wide ragne of lessons to learn.

I think we need to consider one more point when looking at this Rashbam.
Rashi filled numerous kuntrusin, there are many versions of Rashi. His
grandson wasn't commenting that Rashi needed to write many of them rather
than one. I think his point is that it's impossible to ever write p'shat
as quickly as it changes.

-mi

							Bs"d
Haman had to walk before Mordechai and call out: "Kacha ye'asei l'ish 
asher" When a woman does chalitza, she says to her brother-in-law: "Kacha 
ye'asei l'ish asher." Comments on what the connection is between these two 
inyanim, anyone?

Micha Berger
> I've seen a number of divrei Torah comparing Tamar's quest to build malchus
> David with aishes Potifar's knowledge that her line would include Yosef's
> children. The two moshiach's will come from these two women.

There is another irony....

We understand that Er and Onan were guilty of hashchasas zera...

But in a sense their *deaths* were also a form of hashchasas zera for Yehuda in that his zera was "destroyed" (albeit in not the same manner).  Think about it.

Good Hanukkah
Rich wolpoe 

Does anyone know what this sefer is?

The Chabad weekly magazine quotes it in comparing Yosef's leshon hara
with Yaakov's kabolas L"H.  Yosef was punished with 12 years in prison,
while Yaakov was punished with 22 years of thinking that Yosef was dead.

Nice vort, but I'd be interested in who the source is;  it is quoted in
language which sounds like a Midrash.

RYZ?

Gershon
gdubin@loebandtroper.com
gershon.dubin@juno.com 

From: "Gershon Dubin" <gdubin@loebandtroper.com>
> Does anyone know what this sefer is?

In the "Otzar Midroshos" there are 3 similar Midroshos Miuchos to Rabbeinu 
Hakodosh "Chupas E-l-i-yohu" "Maseh Torah" and "Pirkei Rabbenu Hakadosh" 
(they are all based on Mamorei Chaza"l that start with a number), many of the 
Mamorim attributed to the latter 2 are actualy found in the Chupas E. the one 
quoted above is in the C"E second Perek (Mamorim on the number 4) Ois 35.

Our Chaver R' Y. Dubitsky may want to elaborate more on these Midrashim.

Yimei Chanuka Mei'irim, vKol Tuv, 
Yitzchok Zirkind

>  The Chabad weekly magazine quotes it in comparing Yosef's leshon hara
>  with Yaakov's kabolas L"H.  Yosef was punished with 12 years in prison,
>  while Yaakov was punished with 22 years of thinking that Yosef was dead.

Oy!  I (a publically admitted rookie) heard something else completely.
IIRC, doesn't Gemara tell us (Megilla 17a?)  that Yaakov's punishment of 22
years was because Yaakov was away from _his_ father for 22 years?

Also, isn't there another line of thought that Yaakov _never_ thought Yosef
was dead?  (In part because he accomanied Yosef as he left for Sh'chem?)

-- Eric
+----------------------------------------------------------+
| Eric Simon     | erics@radix.net                         |
+----------------------------------------------------------+
| proud daddy to Joshua (4/18/93) and Eliana (3/12/95)     |
+----------------------------------------------------------+

In a message dated Fri, 22 Dec 2000 9:29:34am EST, Eric Simon
<erics@radix.net> writes:
> Also, isn't there another line of thought that Yaakov _never_ thought Yosef
> was dead?  (In part because he accomanied Yosef as he left for Sh'chem?)

Yes-supported by the fact that yaakov refused to be comforted even though
halachically after the aveilut he should have "forgotten" about him.
I often think about this with regard to our galut - that Rachel imeinu
meina lhinachem -refuses to be comforted for her missing children because
we are not dead and will return(bmheira byameinu).

SS and FC
Joel

Check it out, Parashas Shoftim on Som Tasim Alecha Melech.

Also see R' Tzadok Likutei Ma'amarim p. 224 on the Berocho/Amen issue.
KT,
YGB

ygb@aishdas.org      http://www.aishdas.org/rygb

> Check it out, Parashas Shoftim on Som Tasim Alecha Melech.
> Also see R' Tzadok Likutei Ma'amarim p. 224 on the Berocho/Amen issue.

Quick summary?
SS FC
Joel

On Thu, Dec 21, 2000 at 02:11:18PM -0500, Joelirich@aol.com wrote to Areivim:
:> Chag Chunukah Sameach

: Not to quibble but chanukah is not a chag (no korban chagiga)

I know this is true, but I don't see the why -- how the implication
is valid.

According to RSRH, "chag" is related to it being a place on the annual
*cycle*. In which case, the word chagigah comes from chag, not the
other way around. Therefore while one must conclude that every korban
chagigah is brought on a chag, I don't see why one must conclude that
every chag must have a chagigah.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 When you come to a place of darkness,
micha@aishdas.org            you do not chase out the darkness with a broom.
http://www.aishdas.org       You light a candle.
(973) 916-0287                  - R' Yekusiel Halberstam of Klausenberg zt"l

Final-Recipient: RFC822; avodah@aishdas.org
Action: failed
Status: 5.1.1
Remote-MTA: DNS; mail.aishdas.org
Diagnostic-Code: SMTP; 550 <avodah@aishdas.org>... User unknown
Last-Attempt-Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2000 00:31:06 +0200 (IST)

jjbaker@panix.com wrote:
: I don't recall seeing Micha's variant, which combines the latter two
: opinions: shir shevach shelayom.  Who uses it?

R'Micha replied:
: I have it in two siddurim, one printed in British Mandate Palestine, the
: other in 1970s Israel. I had assumed (based on the earlier siddur) that it 
: was the Israeli talmidei haGra minhag.

Yekke siddurim such as Roedelheim and ZB's Avodat Yisrael have shelayom
in one word. But, if R' Micha checks back in his minhag ha-GR"A siddurim
he will probably find that the nusach is zeh shevach shelayom with the
word shir omitted.

Enjoy Hanukka,
David

Moshe Feldman:
> AFAIK, it's accepted halacha that an electric menorah is pasul for ner
> chanukah because it's like a m'durah (torch). OTOH, it's much easier to
> see and lasts throughout the night (and many say that the definition of
> "ad she'tichleh regel min hashuk" has changed since the time of chazal
> and depends on the habits of each given society). I have seen some people
> light both regular and electric menorahs. What the chevrah think of this?>

Let me pose a theoretical question: suppose one put up a giant billboard
describing the nes of hanukka. Would that constitute pirsumei nissa?
Obviously, pirsumei nissa can be accomplished only in the way that Hazal
thought appropriate. If hazal did not feel that one is yotzei the mitzva
with medurah, it means that al pi halokho there's no pirsumei nissa
with it.

So by putting up a medurah you accomplish nothing.

As far as the later zman of tikhle regel etc. and R. Velvel's minhag:
RYBS used to talk about that a lot on hanukka, and he was mesuppak about
the zman nowadays; he said that l'khat'hilla one should try to light so
that the candles burn until late. It appears that the shiur is set by
the community.

For those who live in Manhattan, who knows what the shiur is? But in
Boston, the streets started emptying out around 8 PM. I have looked
around in Queens and it appears also that most people come home from work
(perhaps excepting those who who share Moshe's profession) by 8:30. There
are people out later, to be sure, but mostly people who have already been
home and are now going out to learn, daven, an errand, etc., and those
do not count: tikhle regel etc. was set not according to people coming
home from davening but from work, when the rush is. Shabbos candles that
last 4 hours seem to fit the bill, and RYBS felt it was more important
hiddur to have candles that burn brightly, clearly, and last a long time
than to light with oil.

Seth Mandel

On Wed, Dec 20, 2000 at 03:37:36PM -0500, jjbaker@panix.com wrote:
: I'd speculate that this might be related to the nature of rabbinic 
: mitzvot as kiyumim of lo tasur...
:                         .  Since the onen is still obligated in the
: positive mitzvot, the rabbinic mitzva of pirsumei nisa is still incumbent
: on him - so he lights with a bracha.

Even if I understood RRB's tzvei dinim, I don't see how this would help.
If we say that all dinim diRabbanan are lavim, then both hadlakah and
pirsumei nisah (PN) are diRabbanan, and an onein would be as chayav as the
rest of us without saying PN is different.

And, if an onein is mechuyav in diRabbanans then why don't we make him
daven three times a day on the chashash that daily tefillah is diRabbanan?
Or birachos hanehenin. Or...

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 When you come to a place of darkness,
micha@aishdas.org            you do not chase out the darkness with a broom.
http://www.aishdas.org       You light a candle.
(973) 916-0287                  - R' Yekusiel Halberstam of Klausenberg zt"l

On Wed, Dec 20, 2000 at 01:18:28PM -0500, David Glasner wrote:
: > This only refers to NEW halachahs that are derived from Scripture through
: > the 13 exegetical rules.
: 
: I'm sorry I don't understand what you mean by a "new halachah."

Takkanos, dinim diRabbanan, new derashos.

What about a p'sak halachah? What if one BD resolved a machlokes
according to one shitah, and another BD chose the other shitah --
where both shitos predate even the first BD?

Sanhedrin not only legislates, it also interprets existing dinim.

: Well, now I'm thoroughly confused, because the whole point of the Dor
: Revi'i was to contrast the ideal halakhic system when there is a 
: Sanhedrin with the new system that resulted from the redaction of the 
: Mishnah...

Yes, but you had asked how one would understand the Rambam without the
dor Revi'i. So of course the answer won't fit his shitah. RGS and I argue
that the Rambam is dealing with the ideal system only, not the new one. We
don't even have indication of how he felt this new system should work.

: Excuse me, are you saying that a Sanhedrin that could ignore a bat kol 
: transmitting an explicit directive from the RShO could not ignore the
: precedent of an earlier Sanhedrin?

Yes (assuming that the tanur shel achnai story is the norm). Lo bashamayim
hi rules out listening to shamayim. It doesn't mean that one isn't supposed
to listen lihefech. As R' Gil wrote, the halachic process was given to us
to create halachah with. If that process includes the power of precedent,
then we have to follow precedent in some cases.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 When you come to a place of darkness,
micha@aishdas.org            you do not chase out the darkness with a broom.
http://www.aishdas.org       You light a candle.
(973) 916-0287                  - R' Yekusiel Halberstam of Klausenberg zt"l

In mail-jewish v25n24, Menashe Elyashiv wrote:
: "True, minhag avotanu beyadanu, however it appears that minhag hamakom
: overrides this rule. The reason for not putting on Teffilin on H.H. in
: Eretz Israel is because the three main groups of the original settlers
: of Eretz Israel in the last generations did not put on Teffilin...

To which R' Carl Sherer replied:
: IMHO the answer begs the question.  It essentially says that because 
: the minhag of those who settled in Eretz Yisrael in the 18th and 19th 
: centuries had a different minhag, that minhag is followed.  If that 
: is so, why do we still see many different nuschaot (versions) of 
: davening in Eretz Yisrael?

Actually, on points that all three groups (Sepharadim, Chassidim and
Granikim) have the same nusach, E"Y DOES follow that nusach. For example,
the longer version of "Yechadsheihu" for birchas hachodesh.

-mi

One of the letter writers, in the course of commenting on the give and
take between Rabbi Bechoffer and myself comments that uncovering hair for
a married woman goes against the explict text of the "SA" which I assume
means 'shulchan aruch'.  This is quite incorrect.  In Even Haezer 115 the
shulchan aruch seems to classify full uncovering of hair as a dat yehudit
and not a dat moshe (unlike the Rambam, who calls it a dat moshe.). Beit
Shmuel notes that this SA is incorect, and full uncovering is a dat moshe,
and not a dat yehudit.  Of course, the comments of bet shmuel simple raise
the question further, which is "why did the mechaber not classify full
uncovering as a dat moshe, as rambam does".  the longer hebrew paper that
I mentioned hopes to asnwers this question.  You will have to read the
paper to understand the answer.  (The writer also asked about poskim who
explictly say this, and I will address that issue later on.)

By the way, Rabbi Hershel Schachter himself has acknowledged that the view
of RJBSolovietchik on hair covering is unclear, and perhaps the Rav
himself agreed with the view attributed to Rav Moshe Soloveitchik, his
father, that hair covering is not a torah obligation.  In Bet Yitzchak
volume 27 page 17, RHSchachter writes (in one of his sequels to nephesh
harav) that "One the matter of hair covering: See what I wrote in Nephesh
Harav 255 with regards to hair of married women.  One student ask
RJBSolociechik if what he had heard in the name of Rav Moshe Soloveitchik
was correct that that which is found in ketubot 72a that "rosho paru
deorayta" does not mean that it really is a torah prohibition, but rather
only a rabbinic prohibition [note by mjb: rabbinic prohibition means dat
yehudit, which means time and place bound.].  Rabbi JB Soloveitchik
responded that he did not remember if he heard this from his father, but
it appears from the phrasing in the sifri (naso) that the word "upara et
rosh haisha" "lemad la benot yisrael shehain mechasot roshayhen, af al pe
sheain raya ledavar zecher ledavar shenemar vatikach tamar afar al rosha
..." from the words of the brayta "af al pe shein raya ledavar zecher
ledavar" it appears explictly that this is not a realy drasha from the
torah [mjb note: but merely rabbinic = dat yehudit].

Michael Broyde

As long as we are investigating the missing nun in Ashrei and nafal or
ne'eman, I think it would be interesting to see a comment on the missing
vav from the alef-bet of the pesukim in L'David, b'shanoto et ta'amo
lifnei Avimelekh. Who has some knowledge on this missing letter?

David

There is an explicit raayo from the Rambam in Hilkhos G'zelo Va'avedo
11:3 about hashovas aveido (I'll quote most in translation, to avoid my
tortured transcription):
> The avedo of a Goy is muttar (to take for yourself) since the Torah
> says "avedas ohikho." And one who returns it commits an aveiro, since
> he contributes to the support of evil people in the world. However, if
> he returned it l'qaddesh es haShem, so that they will praise Jews and
> acknowledge that they are believers in G-d, then it is praiseworthy. And
> in a situation where there would be hillul haShem, it is forbidden to take
> [the Goy's aveido], rather one must return it... [if a Goy makes a mistake
> in calculating your bill, you do not have to pay the amount of the error:]
> This is if the Goy makes the mistake by himself and the Jew says to him
> 'I am relying on your calculation and I have not made one of my own;
> what you tell me is what I'll pay.' In this case, it is muttar. But if
> [the Jew] didn't say so, it is osur, lest the Gentile be trying to test
> him, v'nimtzo Shem Shomayim mishallel.

Since this is specifically talking about Goyim, and specifically mentions
hillul hashem and qiddush hashem, I don't know of any way of wiggling
out of that, except that other rishonim might not agree with the Rambam.

Seth Mandel

Eli Linas
> Haman had to walk before Mordechai and call out: "Kacha ye'asei l'ish 
> asher" When a woman does chalitza, she says to her brother-in-law: "Kacha 
> ye'asei l'ish asher."...

Bapashtus "Kachah yei'ase" is a formula for making something public.
The ikkar humiliation of Haman was that it was public and the same goes
for the yavam.

Good Hanukkah
Rich Wolpoe 

[Part of a reply on Areivim... -mi]

Avroham Avinu ... sure went around doing Kiruv.

Akiva

On 21 Dec 2000, at 13:20, Akiva Atwood wrote:
> Avroham Avinu ... sure went around doing Kiruv.

Did he? Or did he stay home with his tent with the four doors and welcome 
people into his home? Did he wander the streets like a rocheil or was he 
mekareiv people by his personal example, by developing a reputation for 
chessed that attracted people to him? Nisht azoi pashut....

-- Carl
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.

>: Avroham Avinu ... sure went around doing Kiruv.

> Actually, we don't know that.

We *do* know that he was sitting out looking for guests after his bris when
the three malachim came.

He *wasn't* sitting in his tent.

Akiva

On Thu, Dec 21, 2000 at 07:31:03PM +0200, Akiva Atwood wrote:
: We *do* know that he was sitting out looking for guests after his bris when
: the three malachim came.

: He *wasn't* sitting in his tent.

Exactly. And being sucha baal chessed that he *needed* to have guests is
what impressed people enough to want to learn his hashkafos.

It works either way.

-mi

RMB asks
> We do know that he was mekareiv people. But was he going out marketing
> religion, or was he such a ba'al chessed that people came to him in
> numbers where marketing wasn't necessary?

RCS asks
>  Did he? Or did he stay home with his tent with the four doors and welcome 
>  people into his home? Did he wander the streets like a rocheil or was he 
>  mekareiv people by his personal example, by developing a reputation for 
>  chessed that attracted people to him? Nisht azoi pashut....

I too mentioned about Avrohom Avinu O"H but I only gave a Mareh Mokom (Rambam 
Hil. Avoda Zara 1:3) I guess that is the Chisoron with giving a M"M witout a 
brief quote, so I apologize the Rambam writes (loose free translation) -

...as soon that AAO"H recognized and understood about G-d, he began debating 
with the people of Ur Kasdim, and told them that their way is wrong and he 
broke their idles, and he began notifying the nation that it is not fitting 
to serve anyone other then the G-d of the world....and he began to stand and 
call out in a loud voice to the whole world, and notified them that there is 
one G-d for the entire world, and him it is fitting to serve, and he went 
around calling and gathering the nation from city to city and from kingdom to 
kingdom, until he arrived in Eretz Knan and he continued announcing as it 
says "Vayikra Sham Bsheim Hashem K-l Olom", and once the nation gathered 
around him and asked him about his ideas he notified to each and everyone 
according to their understanding until he returned them to the true path, 
until tens of thousands gathered around him...

And see the Migdal OIz there who answers the question of the Ravad what about 
Shem Veiver, that they only were Mocha on their Kroivim and taught in Botei 
Midroshos to those who came there to learn, but they did not sacrifice 
themselves.

Yimei Chanuka Mei'irim, vKol Tuv, 
Yitzchok Zirkind

From: "Stuart Klagsbrun" <Stuart_Klagsbrun@ccm.agtnet.com>
> Will I get in big trouble for replying that the RaMBaM is lov davke a
> p'shat and might fall into the drash catagory?

Another point, obviously the Ravad and all the Mforshim had no problem with 
it's meaning.

You also did not address what I was Mitzayin to the Rambam WRT what the 
purpose of the Nvi'im were.

Yimei Chanuka Mei'irim, vKol Tuv, 
Yitzchok Zirkind

On Thu, Dec 21, 2000 at 05:25:50PM -0500, Stuart Klagsbrun wrote:
: Will I get in big trouble for replying that the RaMBaM is lov davke a 
: p'shat and might fall into the drash catagory?

Lihefech, what is d'rash for if not to provide lessons for us to act on?

-mi

[Not from Areivim. -mi]

It would seem that the Rambam is choleik with Reish Lakish. "Vayita
eishel biV'eir Shava, vayikra sham bisheim Hashem..." (Ber' 21:33).
Reish Lakish (Sotah 10b) pulls an al tikri to change this to "vayakri".
That Avraham's eishel, be it an orchard or a hotel, was such a chessed
that it caused others to call out bishem Hashem.

Thanks to OhrNet for pointing this out amongst their pshetlach for
daf yomi. (Ever notice that "pshetlach" have little to do with p'shat?)

Also, in the same d'var Torah, they note that Ramban (12:8) says that Avraham
did engage in active outreach, but only after getting the b'rachah from
HKBH. Until he was told that "mivorechicha baruch" he didn't actively
promote emunah -- "only" lead by example.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 When you come to a place of darkness,
micha@aishdas.org            you do not chase out the darkness with a broom.
http://www.aishdas.org       You light a candle.
(973) 916-0287                  - R' Yekusiel Halberstam of Klausenberg zt"l

Micha Berger wrote:
> The question, AIUI, is whether chalav hacompanies has the chalos sheim of 
> "chalav akum".

Sorry for not having the exact citation, but the Pri Chadash claims that
the gezeira of chalav akum is one of those that does not need a beis
din to be matir it. Whenever there is no chashash, there is no issur.
According to the Pri Chadash (and the Rambam is mashma this way also),
even vadai chalav akum is mutar if we know that is kosher milk.

See also http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol04/v04n328.shtml#04 and 
http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol04/v04n330.shtml#09

Gil Student

Micha Berger
> The question, AIUI, is whether chalav hacompanies has the chalos sheim of
> "chalav akum".

> Also, looking at R' Moshe's lashon, he apparantly saw it as a takkanah.
> In which case, how can we be mevateil a takkanah because the reason
> evaporated? ...

FWIW, Gil posted a URL from the Star K.

AIUI, R. Moshe uses an "anan sahadi" which in this case is applied to
mean: it's as if we were there supervising it ourselves.

I guess the lamdus has little to do with toras chalav akkum and a lot
to do with toras aidus. And that is probably why outside the USA the
criteria would often be different. IOW the way the USDA's rules and
enforcements are structured, this can be relied upon.

Good Hanukkah
Richj Wolpoe 

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


[ 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         ]