Avodah Mailing List

Volume 12 : Number 083

Monday, January 26 2004

• Re: The ta'am of stam yeinam
• Re: Tearing Keriah in diff situations
• RE: Grama redux
• Re: Grama redux
• Re: Longest posuk in the Torah(revisited)
• 10 Tevet
• Re: 10 Tevet
• Re: Halloween
• Shechinah
• Re: Mi she'asa nisim
• Re: But They're Jewish...Aren't they?

I can't comment on the reason behind stam yeinam because I am still going
through Dr. Hayim Soloveitchik's recently published but long anticipated
work on the subject titled "Yeinam".

Ke-darko ba-kodesh, he goes through the different schools within
the rishonim and tries to distinguish between the approaches. He also
painstakingly paints the historical picture - that wine was a staple of
daily life, a major subject of trade in Germany, etc.

He briefly mentions that the issue of chasanus is only brought up by
later rishonim, but I have not yet reached his discussion of this issue.

Gil Student
gil@aishdas.org
www.aishdas.org/student

R Akiva Miller wrote:
> I've heard similar things from others, but is it a fair comparison? IIRC,
> shiva is a vadai d'rabanan, and the nine days (even shavua shechal bo) is a
> strong minhag, right?

Yes, but the comparison is still fair.

After all, the greater number of questions doesn't usually stem from the
sho'eil saying to himself, "If this were derabbanan, I know I would do
it, but since it's a minhag, let me go ask."

I think RYMRubin's observation is valid. When someone is in aveilus r"l,
they want the catharsis of aveilus, and don't want a hava amina of showing
less than full kavod for the niftar. R"L people don't feel churban bayis
to the point of needing catharsis to deal with the pain.

For many of us (speaking of myself in particular), the aveilus on 9 beAv
is "only" about the human suffering galus caused. While I do feel some
sadness over the loss of the bayis itself, I can't relate to its real
value to the point of feeling aveilus over it. As I posted here back
in the early days, sometimes the only kavanah I can muster for much of
mussaf is, "Oy, Ribono shel olam! Look how much I lost! I can't even ask
for this qorban really meaning it! Restore the mussaf both in my heart,
and in Y-m beis miqdoshekha..."

My yahadus of urban home, shul and beis medrash is so far from the yahadus
of nachalah, farming, davening kevasiqin because one lives by the sun's
schedule and qorbanos that I have no hasagah of any of this. R"L I even
feel pride that I at least still feel a sense of loss over losing the
sense of loss.

Chaval al de'avdan.

:-)BBii
-mi

-- 
Micha Berger             You will never "find" time for anything.
micha@aishdas.org        If you want time, you must make it.
http://www.aishdas.org                     - Charles Buxton
Fax: (413) 403-9905

[Micha, on Avreivim. The subject was avdus vs slavery as part of a general
discussion comparing western and Torah morality:]
> The difference is HUGE, large enough that I don't see how anyone can
> call the two the same institution. Even an eved kanaani is closer to
> being an employee in this post-industrial revolution world than slavery.

The main idea of slavery is the "ownership" of another human being. Torah
allows that (sometimes mandates it) and considers that ownership moral.

Modern thought holds the idea of one human owning another, no matter how
good their treatment, as immoral.

Akiva

On Fri, Jan 23, 2004 at 03:37:13PM +0200, Akiva Atwood wrote:
: The main idea of slavery is the "ownership" of another human being. Torah
: allows that (sometimes mandates it) and considers that ownership moral.

You're underestimating the difference between the two systems of thought.

With the exception of bal yira'eh, the western notion of ownership doesn't
enter Torah thought. Ba'alus is about responsibility for an object and
control over it, which is different than property as defined in secular
law.

I raised this point in the past in response to one of RYGB's VIDC
challenges.

Ferinstance: A rentor has ba'alus, but no ownership. He qualifies as
a ba'al WRT mezuzah. If a co-op owner has a strict co op agreement,
he could actually have less ba'alus than most rentors.

For similar reasons, a qinyan sudar, normally used to take ba'alus, is
also used to accept hischayvus upon oneself. Because such hischayvus is
the root of ba'alus, the process for the two is the same.

An important point when discussing ba'al qua husband with someone with
feminist objectives. Since qiddushin requires the husband to provide
for the wife, he is a ba'al. That doesn't mean it's an owner-chattel
relationship.

:-)BBii
-mi

-- 
Micha Berger             You will never "find" time for anything.
micha@aishdas.org        If you want time, you must make it.
http://www.aishdas.org                     - Charles Buxton
Fax: (413) 403-9905      

about 6 months ago i posted a question on-list, which posuk in the torah
has the most number of words.

a few people sent Devarim 13:6 = 32 words

today as i was going over this weeks parsha i came across a posuk that
beats it.

Shemois 7:19 = 33 words

Gut Shabbos
Simcha G

From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
>                                                 ...  The LXX was produced
> under duress, because of coersion applied by Ptolmy....
> that it was as treif in motive as the KJV -- one was in order to allow
> the accretion of the Jewish religion into the Hellenist one, the other
> to allow its inclusion in a religion derived from the the Hellenist one.

Do we know that LXX is the version produced for Ptolemy? The version
of the story in Megillah has 5 people working on it, not 70, and the
intentional mistranslations don't correspond to the mistranslations in
the LXX.

On Fri, Jan 23, 2004 at 01:40:57PM -0500, Jonathan Baker wrote:
: >                                                 ...  The LXX was produced
: > under duress, because of coersion applied by Ptolmy....

: Do we know that LXX is the version produced for Ptolemy? The version
: of the story in Megillah has 5 people working on it, not 70, and the
: intentional mistranslations don't correspond to the mistranslations in
: the LXX.

We don't. I wrote earlier this thread that I was simply using LXX
because the identification implied by the medrash's version gives us an
easy-to-use label.

Just take my comments as relating to the translation completed on 8
Teves and mourned on the 10th -- whichever that may be. After all we're
comparing the responses -- mourning vs requesting Aquilas's work --
not particular translations.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger             A person must be very patient
micha@aishdas.org        even with himself.
http://www.aishdas.org         - attributed to R' Nachman of Breslov
Fax: (413) 403-9905      

I don't think there's really an AZ problem with the modern USAn holiday
of Halloween. I think the connection between it and the pre-Xian
holiday that it evolved from is so tenuous that it's of interest only
to historians. All of the customs that we know are modern USAn (and
don't really exist outside the USA, except as they have been exported
via TV), and have no religious meaning at all.

I object to Halloween and its customs for a completely different reason -
it seems to me not only to be a pale reflection of Purim, but one that
reverses an essential moral lesson. On Purim, kids in costume knock
on people's doors and *give* them candy. Sure, they're hoping to be
given something back (either shalach manot or 'purim gelt'), but they
understand that there is no obligation, and that the essence of what
they are doing is giving stuff away.

On Halloween, USAn kids knock on people's doors and demand candy with
menaces. Sure, the threat of a 'trick' is not usually meant seriously
(or at least the parents teach the children not to mean it seriously,
but many teenagers take it so seriously that they don't even bother
giving people the choice of buying them off with a 'treat'), and the
demand is really more of a request phrased in impolite terms for the
sake of tradition, but the basic lesson remains, and it doesn't strike
me as the best chinuch.

-- 
Zev Sero                    "I will do whatever the Americans want,
zsero@free-market.net       because I saw what happened in Iraq, and
                             I was afraid."
                                                - Muammar Gadaffi

As I am sure many of us noted, the shechinah issue is very much nogei'ah
the penultimate blatt in Menachos.

YGB

From: MPoppers@kayescholer.com
> In a previous digest, GDubin asked:
>: 1.Mi she'asa nisim la'avosenu
>: 2. vega'al osam me'avdus lecherus
>: Hu yig'al osanu bekarov.
>: Why do we mention nissim if we're not asking for them?...

>  I see the nusach of Rav Amram Gaon, and it _does_ ask for nissim:
> "Mi she'asah nissim la-avosainu umiMitzrayim g'alam, Hu yig-al osanu
> v'yashiv banim ligvulam b'siman tov y'hai lanu rosh chodesh {p'loni}
> b'yom {p'loni}, Hu ya'aseh i'manu nissim v'niflaos b'chol a'is uvchol
> sha'ah, lanu ulchol a'mo Yisrael."

And does anyone comment about what the geula has to do with RC or the
Shabbos prior?

Why this special and unique tefilah?

SBA
[I would normally look up my Otzar Hatefilos before posting - but I
doubt that this is available in Rotorua - New Zealand - where I am
(wasting my time in an internate cafe - as my wife keeps reminding me).

On Sun, 2004-01-25 at 01:10, Suelynn Saper wrote [to Areivim]:
> ... I must ask if considering that these men were Jewish at birth are
> they no longer considered Jews according to halakhah and if they are
> then how can they be at the same time considered righteous gentiles? ...

>> Yad Vashem Recognizes the Late Father Alexandre Glasberg and His
>> Brother Vila Glasberg as Righteous Among the Nations
>> (January 12, 2004) 
...

http://shamash3.shamash.org/tanach/tanach/commentary/mj-ravtorah/kitavo.01.ravtorah.01

"The Rav asked what is the status of Meshumad? Does he retain complete
Kedushas Yisrael or not? On the one hand there are sources in the Gemara
that he remains a complete Jew (for instance his Kedushin is valid, see
Yevamos 47b). On the other hand, there are other sources that exclude
him from various religious tasks (Shechita, Kiesivas Stam and others,
see Gittin 45b). (The Rav said that something held him back from saying
that a Yisrael Meshumad retained full Kedushsa Yisrael.) Which Kedusha
does the Meshumad lose? The Rav said that the inherited Kedusha of a
descendant of the patriarchs is irrevocable. However, the Rav felt that
a Meshumad forfeited the second Kedusha that is based on the selection
of the Jewish nation as the chosen people."

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


[ 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         ]