Avodah Mailing List

Volume 06 : Number 104

Wednesday, January 17 2001

• Re: A source
• Re: A source
• Re: a source
• Re: Life span
• Re: Life span
• RE: Life span
• Re: Woman and learning
• RE: Avodah V6 #102- heicha kedusha
• Re: minha without tahanun
• Re: A Source
• Re: [heicha Kedusha and] Davening
• RE: Life span
• Sources - Kohanim Gdolim
• Re: Elevators
• Re: Woman and learning
• Heicha Kedusha
• Re: v'hash'vi'i vs. uvash'vi'i
• Re: Mayyim Acharonim
• Re: Elevators

In a message dated 01/15/2001 9:39:29am EST "Eli" linaseli@netvision.net.il
writes:
> Anyone have a source for the expression: "u'teshu'as (or "teshu'as) Hashem 
> k'heref eyin"?

I only found those exact words in 2 tshuvot - Yosef ometz 104  and sridei 
eish 2:125

KT
Joel

On 15 Jan 2001, at 16:04, Eli Linas wrote:
> Anyone have a source for the expression: "u'teshu'as (or "teshu'as) Hashem 
> k'heref eyin"? ...

Isn't it *Y*shuas Hashem k'heref ayin?

-- Carl

mailto:cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il
mailto:sherer@actcom.co.il

I asked:
>Anyone have a source for the expression: "u'teshu'as (or "teshu'as) Hashem
>k'heref eyin"? I searched the Torah CD Library, and looked in the m'chlol,
>with no success. Anyone have Bar-Ilan, or any other resources they could
>check? I need it ASAP. Thanks a lot.

                                                 Bs"d
Someone responded off line:

It's in the Michlol -- but the expression is "y'shuas," not "t'shuas."
He does not quote a true source, but says "Ayain Mincha LiY'hudah, pp.
27-28.

Thanks for the response (and to others who also responded). FWIW, the 
expression as I saw it in a sefer I'm working on, was as I recorded it - 
t'shuas, not y'shuas. It occurs to me that if there is no exact source, 
then it's eilu v'eilu. In any event, I do not have access to a Minchah 
L'Yehudah. Anyone out there have one? If so, could I trouble you to take a 
look at it and tell me what it says? Thanks.

Eli

> Does anyone have mekoros for whether the *general* life span in pre-Avos
> generations was as long as described for those people mentioned in
> Chumash? Or were those people the exception?

Machlokes b/w Ramban and Rambam - see Ramban on Braishis 5:4.  (The Ohr 
haChaim in this past week's parsha gives a kabbalistic twist to why those 
doros had such a long lifespan, 47:29 d"h gam hay'ir...)

-Chaim B.

Gershon Dubin wrote:
> Does anyone have mekoros for whether the *general* life span in pre-Avos
> generations was as long as described for those people mentioned in
> Chumash? Or were those people the exception?

It's a machloketh (isn't everything?).  See Moreh Nevuchim 2:47, Ramban on
Breishith 2:4 and Sefer HaZikaron (by the Ritva) ad. loc.

David Riceman

From:  Gershon Dubin gershon.dubin@juno.com
> Does anyone have mekoros for whether the *general* life span in pre-Avos
> generations was as long as described for those people mentioned in
> Chumash? Or were those people the exception?

Tangentially, what is the source for the 120 Year lifespans?

The pasuk at the end of parsrhas Bereshis (6:3) seems to indicate that
Hashem was giving the dor hamabaul another 120 years to striaghten out
and that this has nothgin to do with life-span per se.

I had thought that the peshat might refer to the 120 year life span and
the drash to the 120 year warning, but the Ibn Ezra himself - the great
pashtan - dismisses the lifespan interpretation completely, ayein sham.

Shalom
Rich Wolpoe 
  

In a message dated 01/15/2001 9:42:45 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
C1A1Brown@aol.com writes:
> I didn't think that was the pshat - rather l'maskanas hagemara the zechus
> of aino metzuveh by T"T is sufficient. It is almost mefurash this way
> in rambam...

Did you read it as applying to both facilitation and actual learning?

KT
Joel

I did not follow or read from the beginning , but would like to put my two
cents in. I have been bothered by this issue for many years and here are
some of the issues and thoughts and I would like some feedback.

1) The amount of time an employee is allowed to take a break is either
Shalom Aleichem Rebbi or/and(mori).

2) Minimum Lunchtime is designated by law or by the company regulations.

3) The halacha covers the obligation of a worker to daven when he is "up in
the trees".

4) Many minyanin are not on lunch hour but are at 3 or 4 pm. Most people do
not (in fact) reduce the lunch time by the amount of mincha time.

5) If mincha is not at "lunch time" then you have the following calculation.

	The average worker:
	a)Checks messages and e-mails and shmoozes for 3-5 minutes before
going to mincha which takes another 2-3 minutes to get to
	b) mincha could take anywhere form 10-17 minutes depending on the
speed of the minyan.
	c) 2-3 minutes to get back to office and finish shmoozing
	d) 2-3 minutes to get back into your thoughts.

	    20 minutes (the minimum time) 
	x $30 per hour (cost to employer of  a low paid worker)
	   x 10 workers
	   x 5 days a week
	====================
	  $500 per week
	    50 weeks
	  $10,000- lost time for every ten people who daven mincha per year.
The more Kavana the more stolen time.

Multiple this by higher paid workers etc and you have a lot of lost
time.

There is an issue of Livnei Iver on a Biblically Prohibition of Stealing.
Because most people do not reduce their lunch time 15 minutes. 

Could someone please explain the biblical issue of a full repeat for the
shemoneh esrah and why it supercedes the issues of stolen time and money
from employers.

Thanks
Sholom Y Menora

Although I don't know what this means...

I've heard from a few chassidishe rabbonim that the reason not to say
tachnun during Mincha is mincha is a time of dinim and you don't want to
"me'orer the din".

The same reason not to say tachnun by a tzaddik's yahrtzeit (also a time
of din).

mmb

From: Eli Linas <linaseli@netvision.net.il>
> Anyone have a source for the expression: "u'teshu'as (or "teshu'as) Hashem
> k'heref eyin"?

I looked it up in a book called "Michlol Ha'Maamarim Ve'HaPitgamim" by
Harav Moshe Sever.
About "Yeshuat Hashem Ke'Heref Ayin" he says to look up a sefer called
"Mincha L'Yhudah" pp. 27-28.
I have never heard of that sefer, but I hope you have, and I hope you'll
find the source. Please update us once you find it.

Thanks,
Amihai.

In Avodah V6 #102, CSherer replied to me:
>> I'm thinking more of the many associates and support staff in my office
>> (w/out whom there would be no minyan), whose time (as I can personally
>> testify) is often not their own...

> Associates, as I can tell you from several years of having been one,
> have a simple solution - they can always work later :-)

(First, let me be clear: I specified known situations where I believe
there is Halachic room for heicha K'dushah while decrying a general
attitude.

Accordingly, I have answered & will answer your retorts with those
situations in mind, while I believe we concur re the overall Halachic
problem.) That is true, but there may be a reason why associate XYZ
has to [go back to] work on case ABC immediately after Minchah. Along
the same lines, I might miss my office's minyan (as I did one day last
week) because I was busy with a particular issue that, in my judgement,
couldn't be placed on hiatus and resumed 10 minutes later.

> I suspect that the same is often true of support staff most of whom,
> at least when I worked in New York, seemed to manage to get their lunch
> hour every day. [I think you're in an unusual situation because IIRC you
> actually have the minyan in your office, whereas others could just go
> "out to lunch" and stay out for Mincha].

The situation at Kaye, Scholer may be "unusual," but it's the one
I'm speaking of. FWIW, when I've left the office for an outside minyan
(i.e. on tzibbur-level fast days), the outside minyan in question always
had ChSH (and wasn't located at a fellow law firm :-)).

>>>> Take the situation as RW posed it

>> If...if...and if...should that minyan proceed w/out ChSH or not
>> proceed at all?

> Ain hachi nami, of course it should proceed. But how many minyanim
> really have that confluence of circumstances?

The minyan _in the situation as posed by RW_ (as per my original post --
read my words, Carl!).

> What circumstances are enough to constitute a "shas ha'dchak" to make
> a heiche Kdusha? I suspect that if we really start trying to work through
> a definition of "shas ha'dchak," there are an awful lot of heiche Kdusha
> minyanim out there that would not qualify.

I believe you're saying that your Ramat-Gan situation would not qualify
:-). I've defended two particular situations (not that, in the final
analysis, I agree with my office minyan's not having ChSH and not that,
in the final analysis, I believe nothing could be done in RW's situation
which would sufficiently ameliorate its "confluence of circumstances")
and, I think, made my overall point. Let us hope that yir'ai Shomayim
who see these comments and know of heicha K'dushah situations which are
not defensible will summon the courage to question the people involved.

> So then how are you defining shas ha'dchak?

I don't consider myself qualified to define it for purposes of general
applicability, but I can say that I've seen qualified poskim apparently
apply OC 124:2 in a manner more broad than its denotation. In terms of
how OC 124:2 should be applied to a particular case, I reiterate that
I agree with CLuntz's last post on the topic and pray that a qualified
LOR always be consulted.

All the best from
Michael Poppers * Elizabeth, NJ

Rich Wolpoe wrote:
> Tangentially, what is the source for the 120 Year lifespans?
     
Do you mean the common "ad meah ve'esrim"? We see in Tanach that people lived 
longer than 120 years.  For instance, Aharon lived to the age of 123 (Bamidbar 
33:39) and Yehoyada lived to 140 (DH"Y 2 24:15).  Iyov lived to 140 (Iyov 
42:16).

Gil Student

Is there a comprehensive list of all Kohanim Gdolim from Aharon to
churban bayis Sheini, say in Seder hadoros or some other similar sefer?

Shalom and Regards,
Richard Wolpoe
Richard_Wolpoe@ibi.com (at work)
Richard_Wolpoe@alumnimail.yu.edu

RYGB wrote:
> I noticed in am old Intercom that RDB is an expert on the question of
> Elevators and Shabbos. This is one of my weaker areas of understanding
> in Technology and Halocho - might we get some explanation, please?

The subject is a lot too complicated for me to summarize it in a posting.
Also, I would assume you are interested in the halakhic reasoning and
arguments. That is the field in which I am not the expert. The expert
is R' Levi Yitzhak Halperin who has written a book on the subject. I am
the engineer who designs such elevators according to the guidelines of
R"LYH and that meet his halakhic requirements.

I have nothing in my computer on the subject that I can send. A booklet
explaining the physical realities that are the basis of R' Halperin's
psakim is out of print If you give me a home address, however, I
can probably get the Institute of Science and Halakha in Jerusalem to
snail-mail you a Xerox copy. To get RLYH's halakhic analysis you'd have
to buy the book which I think is still available at the Institute.

A few years ago I saw an article in RJJ's Journal of Contemporary ... on
the subject. It gives a good summary of various opinions and a breakdown
of the arguments. Unfortunately, the authors' understanding of some
aspects of how an elevator works is so far from the reality that some
of their decisions lose almost all value.

K"T,
David

> Did you read it as applying to both facilitation and actual learning?

You mean since the Rambam omits facilitating does that mean he is choleik
on the sugya? I don't know.

Leaving the Rambam aside, perhaps you could be medayek in rashi d"h
zechus d'mai - m'gina *kol kach*, that the fact that aino metzuveh is
magein is pashut (after all, ben Azai says chayav adam l'lamed es bito
for that reason), but the kashe is: now that we know the zechus of the
Mishna is for 3 whole years, how can zechus of aino metzuveh last *kol
kach*, so long?

We have discussed this issue at our Kolel, and this question came up:
What should the tzibbur do while the chazzan says the first 3 brachot. If
everybody just answers amen, isn't the chazan davening beyachid? and if
everybody davens belachash with him, then where's chaarat hashatz?

What d'ya think?
Amihai

R'RichW wrote:
> V'hashvi'i can often be found in the tefillos in the back of the old 
> Roedelheim Chumashim.

The tefilot in the back of each volume of my 1818 Roedelheim "M'or
'Einayim" chumash with "Ein Hakorei" has uva-. Are your chumashim older
or younger?

K"T,
David

R'MP wrote:
> "chov" may have a tzad l'hakail when compared to "mitzva,"

The way I heard it, the term chova should be stronger than mitzva.
Mayyim acharonim, however, was a chova because of physical danger,
a matter of sakkana. In the absence of melach S'domit, (magnesium
salts??) there is no health problem or sakkana and so the former chova
is no longer in the same league with the mitzva of mayyim rishonim.

K"T,
David

From: D. and E-H. Bannett <dbnet@barak-online.net>
> A few years ago I saw an article in RJJ's Journal of Contemporary ... on
> the subject. It gives a good summary of various opinions and a breakdown
> of the arguments. Unfortunately, the authors' understanding of some
> aspects of how an elevator works is so far from the reality that some
> of their decisions lose almost all value.

I read the RJJ article.  Which assumptions do you disagree with?

Kol tuv,
Moshe

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


[ 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         ]