Avodah Mailing List

Volume 11 : Number 008

Monday, May 5 2003

• Writing a Sefer Torah
• Re: Hallel and sfira
• Re: Women answering amen to shehechiyanu in kiddush
• quibble and thought Re: somchin al haness
• Re: Miracles (not) in Halacha
• Re: somchin al haness
• Re: Hallel and sfira
• somchin al haness
• [none]
• sirens and chukat hagoi
• Haircuts on Rosh Chodesh which falls on Friday during sefirah
• RE: somchin al haness
• RE: somchin al haness
• Fw: Lo Selech Rochil B'amechoh...(Interchangeable letters)
• Re: Lo Selech Rochil B'amechoh...(Interchangeable letters)
• RE: Rabbi Slifkin, are you there?
• (Fwd) Avodah Zarah 45: Swimming at the "Y"
• Nefilas Apayim
• Quick Lesson By Example: Rabbi Shneur Kotler
• Re: Great non-Jewish works of Mussar

Danny Schoemann wrote:
>1.The Rosh assumes the same laws for Seforim as for a ST:
>- Handwritten, preferably by end user
>- Error free
>- Not inherited

Certainly not. The kisvei yad we have from the rishonim are not even
in Kesav Ashuris and are DEFINITELY not error free.

>2. We take his interpretaion literally - that this mitzva is
>time-dependant. In this case does the mitzva becomes:
>- Buy the best edited seforim available
>- With the latest technology
>- Clearest print (/ latest screen technology?)

No. I think the point of the Rosh is that we are supposed to buy/write
sefarim *from which to learn*. You can learn even from poorly edited,
blurry photostat editions.

>3. We simply hide behind the Rosh to buy the most popular
>versions:
>- With the odd letter missing / malformed
>- With typos

Since most of us are not writing sifrei Torah right now, it seems like
the best option until we have the ability to commission a sefer Torah.
That, and writing/buying a letter in someone else's sefer Torah (which
*might* be some sort of a kiyum).

I would also direct the chevra to R' Chaim Volozhiner's comments in Ruach
Chaim that buying sefarim is a kiyum in "havei misabek be-afar ragleihem".

Gil Student

Anecdotally it seems that many people do not answer BHBS but only amen
to the shatz's bracha. Any idea why? If anything it would seem to me
indicated to show that you are not being yotzeh with his bracha(since
everyone then makes their own). Would there be any problem in being
yotzeh with his bracha?

Shabbat Shalom
Joel Rich

> Rabbi Sternbuch in his book "Moadim U'Zmanim" also makes the point
> that answering Amen [to Shehechiyanu in Kiddush] by a woman who has already
> made a Shehechiyanu [when she lit candles] is
> a Hefsek between the Bracha and tasting the wine and states therefore
> she shouldn't really answer Amen.   But he makes another point, that since
> her Bracha is made before the Yom Tov actually begins, and that since
> it is better to make the Bracha at night when all the Mitzvos are then
> required, it is not considered a Hefsek at all.

I assume that he would agree that were the woman making kiddush after
having lit candles, it would be a b'rachah l'vatalah for her to repeat
Shehecheyanu. Thus, she is no longer m'chuyeves in the b'rachah, and thus
it cannot be argued that since it would have been better to say it then,
it's not a hefsek.

> Also, on the second night of Yom Tov in chu"l women light when it is fully 
> dark, not while it is still the afternoon of the first day.


Not just in chu"l; the same situation arises in EY when Yom Tov is
motza'ei Shabbos.

In Avodah V11 #7, JJBaker wrote:
> what about the brachot such as "lo yihyeh bh'cha `aqar o `aqarah"?

The phrase (D'vorim 7:14) actually is "lo yihyeh v'cha aqar VA'aqarah...." 
I'm sure you'll remember that this coming motzoai Shabbos :-).

> I couldn't say that honestly in v'yiten lecha, unless I understood it
> as something which would only operate in the ideal Torah-cratic state
> in Moshiach's tzeiten, because it clearly doesn't operate now.

See the Ba'al HaTurim ad loc.

All the best from
Michael Poppers * Elizabeth, NJ

Further questions:

What would be the din if eidim zomemim say that Reuven and Shimon
could not have witnessed an event in Israel at 2 pm because they were
in NY at 1:30 pm and Reuven and Shimon respond that they transported
al pi neis to Israel?  Would Reuven and Shimon be huzmu or not?

What if Reuven killed Shimon with eidim and hasra'ah and, during the
trial, Shimon walks into court and confirms that Reuven killed him and
he was just resurrected?  Would Reuven be put to death or not?

I know these seem like silly cases, but a beis din has to look into
every possibility before executing someone.  Are batei din allowed to
take miracles into account and, if not, why not?

Gil Student

On Fri, May 02, 2003 at 05:41:59PM +0300, Akiva Atwood wrote:
: The Baal HaTurim says Yaakov did three things to prepare for his meeting
: -- Prayer, gifts, and arming for battle.
: 
: He doesn't make any distinction between them.
: How does REED justify making a distinction between them?

Why would the BhT make such a distinction. He was talking about covering
all your bases. I don't think you can deduce anything from his silence.
In contrast, REED was bedavka talking about defining these terms.

As you write, it depends on defining "bitachon". Does it only include
faith in H' taking care of the future, or does it also include actions
motivated by that faith?

REED obviously holds the latter.

But the difference isn't only semantic. If you hold that /some/ hishtadlus
is necessary, would this imply that acts aimed as solving the problem
bederekh hateva are? If you say there is histadlus of the non-teva sort,
then there is no such implication.

Another implication of the difference is the question of metaphysical
causality. One could believe that certain pe'ulos are guaranteed to have
certain effects by rules of spiritual mechanics. One one could deny
the existance of such mechanics, and hold that all spiritual causality
is explainable as being pe'ulah changes the po'el which causes sechar.
In the first system, religious activity is made far more parallel to
teva-based acttivity. The latter approach is much more inclined toward
including religious acts under the definition of bitachon.

:-)BBii
-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 Today is the 15th day, which is
micha@aishdas.org            2 weeks and 1 day in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org       Chesed sheb'Tifferes: What is the Chesed in
Fax: (413) 403-9905                                harmony?

On Fri, May 02, 2003 at 12:55:26PM -0400, Joelirich@aol.com wrote:
: Anecdotally it seems that many people do not answer BHBS but only amen
: to the shatz's bracha. Any idea why? If anything it would seem to me
: indicated to show that you are not being yotzeh with his bracha...

A relatively famous RYBS-ism is to say these berakhos with the chazan, so
that one is not yotzei with the Shatz's berakhah. While also not requiring
the ugly machshavah "I don't want to be included in his mitzvah". I
always wondered why saying BHBS wouldn't satisfy the same constraint.

There are other reasons not to say BHBS, although these would only
work if one /never/ does.

1- The Sabbateans noticed the BHBS (without the vav hachibur, though)
equals begamatria Shabbatai Zvi. So, they made a big deal about it.
Which in turn made some qehillos ban saying it.

2- The Gra allegedly (never saw a mar'eh maqom) held that BHBS could
not possibly be a matbei'as chazal. How can one be mevareikh HQBH in a
way that is not really referring to Shemo (as opposed to the Ein Sof
itself)? By saying both, it's clear that is the intent of the first
clause and yet that's nonsensical.

:-)BBii
-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 Today is the 15th day, which is
micha@aishdas.org            2 weeks and 1 day in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org       Chesed sheb'Tifferes: What is the Chesed in
Fax: (413) 403-9905                                harmony?

RAA:
> The Baal HaTurim says Yaakov did three things to prepare for his meeting
> -- Prayer, gifts, and arming for battle. He doesn't make any distinction
> between them.

> I never claimed only prayer was enough -- I just said that prayer was
> a form of hishtadlus.
 
None of which supports R'n RF's contention that learning *is* sufficient
hishtadlus, and thus exempts a class of people from doing the physical
hishtadlus that the Yaakov story, and the Rambam, seem to require.

Perhaps I should rephrase my earlier question as "So I don't see any
source in chazal for this 'spiritual hishtadlus' in isolation, not
associated with a co-temporaneous physical hishtadlus."

   - jon baker    jjbaker@panix.com     <http://www.panix.com/~jjbaker> -

<owner-avodah@aishdas.org> Received: from majordomo1.host4u.net
(majordomo1.host4u.net [209.150.128.43])
	by heras.host4u.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h42ImOV01492
	for <domo@aishdas.org>; Fri, 2 May 2003 13:48:26 -0500
[209.150.128.43])
	by heras.host4u.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h42Im7V01471
	for <owner-avodah@aishdas.org>; Fri, 2 May 2003 13:48:10 -0500
Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 13:47:57 -0500 Message-Id:
<200305021847.h42IlvF00726@majordomo1.host4u.net> To:
owner-avodah@aishdas.org From: owner-avodah@aishdas.org Subject: BOUNCE
avodah@aishdas.org: Approval required: Status: RO Content-Length: 3592
Lines: 68
Sender: owner-avodah@aishdas.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: avodah@aishdas.org

From domo@aishdas.org Fri May  2 13:47:54 2003
Received: from heras.host4u.net (heras.host4u.net [209.150.128.13])
	by majordomo1.host4u.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h42Iln600723
	for <avodah.heras@majordomo1.host4u.net>; Fri, 2 May 2003 13:47:52 -0500
Received: from m09.lax.untd.com (m09.lax.untd.com [64.136.30.72])
	by heras.host4u.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id h42IlgV01293
	for <avodah@aishdas.org>; Fri, 2 May 2003 13:47:45 -0500
Received: from cookie.untd.com by cookie.untd.com for <"kNJ3KhacfsGwn/hpIwORnYRM3Biphs8ZsGpLyfNxq5t+wZLzYzA0x/cheqk2DM6U">; Fri, 02 May 2003 11:46:56 PDT
Received: (from kennethgmiller@juno.com) 
 by m09.lax.untd.com (jqueuemail) id HW7R8XAT; Fri, 02 May 2003 11:46:56 PDT
To: avodah@aishdas.org, remt@juno.com
Cc: MFeldman@CM-P.COM, dmill945@yahoo.com
Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 14:36:38 -0400
Subject: Haircuts on Rosh Chodesh which falls on Friday during sefirah
Message-ID: <20030502.144428.-285257.1.KennethGMiller@juno.com>
X-Mailer: Juno 5.0.33
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-1,6-7,12-13,19-20,24-25,31-32,38-39
From: kennethgmiller@juno.com

(moved from Areivim)

On Areivim, R' Moshe Feldman wrote that <<< In reviewing the MB, I found
that we are allowed (according to all minhagim of the aveilus of sefirah)
to take a haircut this Friday. This wasn't obvious to me (it doesn't
happen that often) so I thought others might appreciate knowing about
this. >>>

R' dmill945 asked <<< Where's this MB? In 260:1(7) he brings the MA that
one shouldn't take a haircut or cut nails on RC even if RC is on Friday
(he doesn't mention sefirah here, so I assume kol shekein during sefirah),
based on the tzava'ah of R. Yehuda haChasid (of course some don't hold
of that tzava'ah bikhlal, eg. Noda Biyhuda). >>>

The Mishna Brurah is 493:5, where he writes "Even for those who follow
the issur also prior to Rosh Chodesh Iyar, nevertheless, if Rosh Chodesh
Iyar falls on Shabbos, since we have the additional simcha of Shabbos
and Rosh Chodesh, we can allow haircuts on Erev Shabbos because of Kavod
Shabbos, and even to get married on that day, since ikar haseudah will be
on Shabbos and Rosh Chodesh." (The Kaf HaChayim 493:12 writes similarly.)

I read the MB brought by R' dmill945 slightly differently than how he
read it. My edition of the MB there says that "there are places" where
they don't get a haircut or cut their nails on Rosh Chodesh. Clearly,
there are other places where they *do* do these things.

I have heard (my LOR and our listmember) Rav Elazar Meir Teitz point
to these two MBs, and note that under our current calendar system,
Rosh Chodesh Iyar is *always* two days, and those two days are *never*
Shabbos and Sunday. In other words, if Shabbos is Rosh Chodesh Iyar, then
that Erev Shabbos is also Rosh Chodesh Iyar. Therefore, under our current
calendar, the MB 493:5 will *inevitably* allow a haircut on Rosh Chodesh!

Rav Teitz concluded from this that while the MB found it worthwhile
to mention in siman 260 that "there are places" which follow R'
Yehudah haChasid, most places obviously don't, or else the MB would
have mentioned it in 493 as well. (Actually, his lashon might have been
even stronger, along the lines of "obviously the MB doesn't hold like R'
Yehudah HaChasid", but I'm not sure.)

Akiva Miller

 From the virtual desk of the OU VEBBE REBBE

The Orthodox Union - via its website - fields questions of all types
in areas of kashrut, Jewish law and values. Some of them are answered
by Eretz Hemdah, the Institute for Advanced Jewish Studies, Jerusalem,
founded by HaRav Shaul Yisraeli, zt"l to prepare rabbanim and dayanim to
serve the National Religious community in Israel and abroad. Ask the Rabbi
is a joint venture of the OU, Yerushalayim Network, Eretz Hemdah... and
the Israel Center. The following is a Q&A from Eretz Hemdah...

Q I am disturbed by the refusal of some religious Jews to stand for
the siren on Yom Hazikaron (Israel Memorial Day). Someone told me it is
forbidden to do so. If this is so, why doesn't the rabbinate come out
against it? If not, shouldn't all religious Jews stand?

A Those who say it is forbidden to stand for the minute of silence on Yom
Hazikaron claim it is a problem of chukot hagoyim (following practices
of gentile nations). Indeed, the practice was learned from non-Jews, and
there is such a prohibition, which is learned from Vayikra 18:2. However,
we have not found a published p'sak that rules that it is forbidden and
explains why (it is possible that one exists). Furthermore, based on the
classical sources on the subject, it is difficult to forbid the practice
on halachic grounds.

There is an apparent contradiction between two gemarot on the parameters
of chukot hagoyim. There was a practice of both Jews and non-Jew to
burn objects after their king's death. The gemarot agree the practice
is permitted, but give different reasons. Avoda Zara 11a says that the
activity does not fall under the category of chuka, but is an act of
chashivuta (showing importance). Sanhedrin 52b says that it is a chuka
but is permitted only because there is a pasuk (Yirmiya 34:5) that makes
it a Jewish practice before a non-Jewish one.

Tosafot (Avoda Zara 11a) explains that these gemarot are
complementary. The chuka of Avoda Zara refers to a practice connected
to idol worship proper. In such a case, a preceding Jewish source for
the custom is insufficient. But, says the gemara, the burning was not
an idolatrous act. Sanhedrin refers to a general, gentile process, which
is permitted only if there is a Jewish precedent. We need to define what
counts as a chuka, because if we go to an extreme, we would have to forbid
all sorts of things, such as wearing a suit and tie (see Igrot Moshe YD
I, 81 who explains why this is not so). The Maharik (88) explains that
practices that are initiated by non-Jews for logical reasons and are not
negative in nature are not considered chukot at all. The Rama (YD 178:1)
paskens like the Maharik, as do a predominant majority of poskim (see
Maharam Shick YD 165, Yabia Omer III, YD 24, and many others), despite the
GRA's (YD 178:7) protestations. (See Rav Y. Henkin's article in Techumin
IV, where he tries to prove that the GRA would agree in our case.)

It is not always simple to apply the rules to contemporary situations. For
example, in three teshuvot, Rav Moshe Feinstein z.t.l. wrestles from
different perspectives with the issue of whether elements of the American
Thanksgiving holiday are chukot hagoyim (Igrot Moshe YD IV, 12 deals
with the contradiction). But in our case, the Maharik's requirements
are clearly met. Anyone who has experienced standing at the siren as
the whole country stops everything together, silently contemplating the
sacrifice and contribution of the fallen kedoshim, knows how effective
a remembrance it is. It is, thus, fully logical and permitted.

So why can't we all agree? Some within the religious community frown
upon almost anything that symbolizes the Israeli government or general
society. Although we share many of their complaints, our approach is to be
thank- ful to Hashem and to the people who have sacrificed to enable all
the good that comes with our Jewish State. While it is a chillul Hashem
not to stand (all the more so, in public), publicizing the phenomenon,
which applies to a minor- ity of the religious community, makes more
chillul Hashem. We feel that one most effectively deals with conflicts
among our people with love, not, for example, by yelling, "Shabbos!" For
the sake of consistency and a desire to make things better, not worse,
we urge that this disagreement be handled with love and understanding,
not mud-slinging.

Ask the Rabbi Q&A is part of Hemdat Yamim, the weekly parsha sheet
published by Eretz Hemdah. You can read this section or the entire
Hemdat Yamim at www.ou.org <http://www.ou.org> or www.eretzhemdah.org
<http://www.eretzhemdah.org>. And/or you can receive

(moved from Areivim)

On Areivim, R' Moshe Feldman wrote that <<< In reviewing the MB, I found
that we are allowed (according to all minhagim of the aveilus of sefirah)
to take a haircut this Friday. This wasn't obvious to me (it doesn't
happen that often) so I thought others might appreciate knowing about
this. >>>

R' dmill945 asked <<< Where's this MB? In 260:1(7) he brings the MA that
one shouldn't take a haircut or cut nails on RC even if RC is on Friday
(he doesn't mention sefirah here, so I assume kol shekein during sefirah),
based on the tzava'ah of R. Yehuda haChasid (of course some don't hold
of that tzava'ah bikhlal, eg. Noda Biyhuda). >>>

The Mishna Brurah is 493:5, where he writes "Even for those who follow
the issur also prior to Rosh Chodesh Iyar, nevertheless, if Rosh Chodesh
Iyar falls on Shabbos, since we have the additional simcha of Shabbos
and Rosh Chodesh, we can allow haircuts on Erev Shabbos because of Kavod
Shabbos, and even to get married on that day, since ikar haseudah will be
on Shabbos and Rosh Chodesh." (The Kaf HaChayim 493:12 writes similarly.)

I read the MB brought by R' dmill945 slightly differently than how he
read it. My edition of the MB there says that "there are places" where
they don't get a haircut or cut their nails on Rosh Chodesh. Clearly,
there are other places where they *do* do these things.

I have heard (my LOR and our listmember) Rav Elazar Meir Teitz point
to these two MBs, and note that under our current calendar system,
Rosh Chodesh Iyar is *always* two days, and those two days are *never*
Shabbos and Sunday. In other words, if Shabbos is Rosh Chodesh Iyar, then
that Erev Shabbos is also Rosh Chodesh Iyar. Therefore, under our current
calendar, the MB 493:5 will *inevitably* allow a haircut on Rosh Chodesh!

Rav Teitz concluded from this that while the MB found it worthwhile
to mention in siman 260 that "there are places" which follow R'
Yehudah haChasid, most places obviously don't, or else the MB would
have mentioned it in 493 as well. (Actually, his lashon might have been
even stronger, along the lines of "obviously the MB doesn't hold like R'
Yehudah HaChasid", but I'm not sure.)

Akiva Miller

> In fact, Vayishlach is one of REED's ra'ayos that one needs both
> bitachon and hishtadlus. Yaaqov's tefillah is literally one of
> the textbook examples of bitachon!

I looked at MmE over Shabbos.

REED *also* considers the "preparing for battle" in spritual terms --
preparing to battle the yetzer hara.

So I don't think we can bring REED to support any form of physical
hishtadlut.

Akiva

=================================
"We took risks, we knew we took them; things have come out against us, and
therefore we have no cause for complaint, but bow to the will of Providence,
determined still to do our best to the last."
Robert Falcon Scott

> Perhaps I should rephrase my earlier question as "So I don't see any
> source in chazal for this 'spiritual hishtadlus' in isolation, not
> associated with a co-temporaneous physical hishtadlus."

Agreed --

(But does artscroll biographies count as "chazal"?) <g,r,&d>

Akiva

 From a Parsha sheet:

> Lo Selech Rochil B'amechoh...(Interchangeable letters)

> Q. A source for the word "Rochil"? and b)  Why 'selech' rochil?

> A. The source for 'rochil' and 'rechilus' is 'rogil' - from 'meragel'
> ie a spy.

> The reasoning behind this is that gossipers and Baalei Loshon Horah
> go into others homes to 'spy' and see and hear what juicy material they
> can pass on to their listeners - thus the use if the word 'selech'.

> In fact we often find in Tenach that davka the words for 'Rechilus' are
> joined with 'halicha' eg 'holech rochil megaleh sod' etc. something we
> do not find in mentions of other types of Loshon Horah.

> Q. So how do we get from 'rochil ' to 'rogil'?

> A. This is achieved by interchanging the chaf (of rochil) with a gimmel -
> seeing they both belong to the 'palatal' group of letters (gimmel, yud,
> chaf, kuf).

> The other groups are: 'gutturals' (alef, hei, ches, ayin), 'dentals'
> (daled, tes, lamed, nun, tov), 'sibilants' (zayin, samech, tsaddi, resh,
> shin), and 'labials' (bes, vav, mem, peh).


[SBA: How come 'chaf' and 'ches' are not in the same group?]

On Sun, May 04, 2003 at 07:54:45PM +1000, SBA wrote:
: How come chaf and ches are not in the same group?]

Because Ashkenazim pronounce the ches "wrong".

Khaf is no more related to ches than it is to shin or sin. All of which
produce nearly white noise (static-like sounds), but do so by causing
turbulence in the air by constricting different parts of the mouth.

-mi

RGS wrote:
> A good book on this subject is Maor le-Maseches Chullin by R. Dr.
> Yisrael M. Levinger (former rav of Basel).  IIRC, in volume 2 he
> also covers some of maseches Avodah Zarah.

Funny:-). Do you think I'd ask on list if it was in that book? I own
two copies of it, one from before I came to Basel, and one I since got
from Rav Levinger himself, during an administrative visit during which
we discussed all his open cases I now have to deal with.

The book only provides pictures and short quotes, not in depth
discussions, which is what I asked for.

Arie

Thought this might be of interest. 

-- Carl

------- Forwarded message follows -------
Date sent:      	Sun, 04 May 2003 17:42:45 +0200
From:           	Mordecai Kornfeld <kornfeld@netvision.co.il>
Subject:        	Avodah Zarah 45: Swimming at the "Y"
To:             	DIscuss list <daf-discuss@shemayisrael.co.il>

(Please include header and footer when redistributing this material.)
_________________________________________________________________

                 THE DAFYOMI DISCUSSION LIST
      brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Yerushalayim
             Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
                      ask@dafyomi.co.il
 [REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE TO DISCUSS THE DAF WITH THE KOLLEL]
________________________________________________________________

Avodah Zarah 45: Swimming at the "Y" 

Shmuel K. asked:
The gemarah on 45 B , says that you are allowed to use the bath house
or garden of a Avodah Zarah as long as " Shlo Betovah ", you don't give
them any benefit. But you are not allowed to use it, if you give them
some type of benefit. From this , I imagine you can infer that you are
allowed to use the basketball court, softball field of a church, or even
use their yard as a short cut to the other side of the street, as long
as you don't pay them for the use, or any other type of appreciation
(and of course, when there are no issues of Maris Eyen, i.e.., on a day
when the church is closed ).

The question arises, is that it is fact, that religious people use
the pool at the YMCA ( a Catholic organization ), and pay to use it.
Clearly benefiting the Catholic religion, as opposed to using the pool
at Jewish organizations. Now if you might answer that the Christian
religion is not Avodah Zarah ( as can be interpreted in the Rema O.C.
156 ), that only applies to Non-Jews. To Jews it definitely is Avoda
Zarah, and would be forbidden to support such organizations. Can you
please explain to me the Heter or Melamed Zecut, on those who permit
this practice. And if so, can this also be applied to other things,
i.e.. can we pay the church for use of their facilities ?

Thank You.

----------------------------------------------
The Kollel replies:

Rabeinu Tam learns that when you pay it is permitted, and it is only
prohibited when you have to actually be Makir Tov to the Avodah Zarah.
The Rema (YD 143:3) says that although we are Machmir like Rashi when
the Avodah Zarah or the priests make the profit, we can be lenient if
the bathhouse is not in the churchyard itself.

However, all of this applies when the business belongs to the church
itself or to the priests. However, I do not think the "Y" actually
belongs to the church or to the clergy; rather, it is merely affiliated
with the religion. If this indeed is the case, then since the profits
do not go directly to the church (even if they do benefit indirectly),
it is permissible.

D. Zupnik

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to
majordomo@shemayisrael.com with this text in the body of the message:
unsubscribe daf-discuss

------- End of forwarded message -------

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.

With Hodesh Nisan behind us and the summer upon us, I wanted to ask
about the well-known Halacha that when falling for Nefilas Apayim it is
essential to put one's head on one's clothing, rather than on one's arm.

According to the Mishna Berura (OH 131:3) this is because one must
cover his face - "Yechaseh Panav" - which would not be accomplished with
one's bare arm which is part of the same body as one's face. The source,
according to the Mishna Berura, is the Magen Avraham.

It appears to me that examination of the Magen Avraham leads to a
different conclusion. The Magen Avraham points to Se'if 8 as the source
for the Halacha. There, the Rema is concerned with falling on one's
face on a stone floor - "Even Maskit" - and suggests putting down grass
to separate between the person and the stones. It seems that the Magen
Avraham is suggesting that falling on one's bare arm would not solve
the "Even Maskit" problem (this is the explanation of the Levushei Srad
at the beginning of Siman 131) since the face and the arm are part of
the same body. If this is true, then a person would not have to separate
between one's arm and one's face, rather between one's face and the floor,
which could be done by doing Nefilas Apayim on a wooden table or chair,
even on one's bare arm.

Is there another source for the Mishna Berura's minhag of covering one's
face, or is the Magen Avraham his only makor? Is it unreasonable to rely
on the simple pshat in the Magen Avraham (as understood by the Levushei
Srad) in situations like camp or other "Mekomot HaTzorech?

My thanks,
Shalom Berger
Alon Shevut

Quick Lesson By Example: Rabbi Shneur Kotler

When the doctor told him that he had but a few months to live ... he
remarked that it was not the pain of his illness that concerned him,
but how his condition would affect his ability to help others ...
he divulged that he had been secretly supporting eleven poor families.

While others will step in to support the yeshivah in his absence, who
would take care of the eleven poor families?

During his last days, he was lying in the hospital and groaning. Asked
if he was in pain, he replied that he was thinking of the casualties
in Lebanon.

BIOGRAPHICAL NOTE: Rabbi Shneur Kotler (1918-1982, Orthodox) was Rosh
HaYeshivah (dean) of the famous Bais Medrash Govoha in New Jersey.
He was very active in helping Jewish refugees from Russia and Iran,
and many other worthy causes.

SOURCE: The Torah Profile: A Treasury of Biographical Sketches, Rabbi
Nisson Wolpin, 1988, Page 246-247, Mesorah Publications, Brooklyn, NY,
ISBN 0-89906-860-X.

Avodah V10 #142
> From: RabbiRichWolpoe@aol.com

> In a message dated 3/24/2003 10:51:34 AM EDT, micha@aishdas.org writes:
>> You reminded me of logotheraphy, and Victor Frankl's observations about
>> man's search for meaning.

> One of the great non-Jewish works of Mussar - IMHO -is Stephen Covery's
> the 7 Habits of Effective People...
> Bottom line, Frankl has been a big influence on the psychology of the
> devoted and pious of many fiaths, and Covey exapnds upon this in a
> hands-on way

I would like to second these recommendations. Victor Frankl's book *Man's
Search for Meaning* is a tremendously inspiring, albeit sorrowful, book.
Much of it is based on what he observed, as a prisoner in a concentration
camp, of the differences between the way religious people and people
without faith coped, or failed to cope, in extremis.

Covey's book is a truly great mussar book, a kind of *Mesillas Yesharim
for Dummies*, that gives very specific advice for working on one's
character and on one's attitude to life. It is very complementary to a
frum way of life. Three years ago, Rabbi Kalman Baumann, the principal
of my kids' elementary school (Toras Emes), gave a six-part series of
lectures on parenting based on various mussar seforim--and on Covey's
book. It was outstanding.

One very specific positive thing resulted from my attending that series.
Rabbi Baumann, quoting Covey, said that people often say they value X and
place a high priority on it, but when you see what they actually spend
their time and energy on, you see that A, B and C get all their actual
attention and effort, and X is continually pushed off for some other time.
If something REALLY is a priority, then you have to MAKE it happen.

I said to myself, "I have been saying for years that I would like my
children to know their aunts and uncles and cousins and, especially,
their grandparents, but it is always too expensive and too hard to take
them all to Israel. They will be grown up before you know it, and they
will never have had the opportunity to do what I keep SAYING is important
to me. And who knows how much time there really is?"

So, without money--thank G-d for credit cards--I took the kids to
Israel that summer and they got to spend six memorable weeks with their
grandparents, B"H. Right after that my father z'tl suffered a sharp
decline in his health and functioning. In retrospect, that summer was
the last possible time my children could have spent time with their
Zeida and gotten to know him at all. I have Rabbi Baumann and Stephen
Covey to thank for that wonderful summer and for that valuable insight:
if it is REALLY important to you, put it at the top of your to-do list.

It is similar to what it says in Pirkei Avos, "Al tomar keshe'efneh
eshneh, shema lo sipaneh." There will never be enough time to do
everything, but you can MAKE time for what is REALLY important to you.
What you really do with your time makes a more powerful statement about
your true priorities than what you SAY you would LIKE to do.

Read Covey's book.  

Toby Katz

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


[ 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         ]