Avodah Mailing List

Volume 15 : Number 064

Friday, August 5 2005

• Re: Shu't Besamim Rosh
• Chassidim-Misnagdim
• Re: Chassidim-Misnagdim
• Re: Chassidim-Misnagdim
• Har Habayis
• Re: harry potter and kishuf
• Re: Chassidim-Misnagdim
• Re: Rav Lichtenstein's halachic analysis of whether soldiers may refuse orders (revised)
• Chassidim, Misnagdim, and now Mussar
• Re: Fw: holy body
• Re: holy body
• Re: Is the World Good?
• Re: Rabbinic law and spirituality
• spiders
• [Hirhurim - Musings] Women Learning Gemara
• Re: [hirhurim] [Hirhurim - Musings] Women Learning Gemara
• Re: [hirhurim] [Hirhurim - Musings] Addictive Behavior
• Re: harry potter and kishuf
• Re: harry potter and kishuf
• [Fwd: [YGB - =?UTF-8?B?15nXkiLXkV0gOC8wNC8yMDA1IDA1OjAzOjUxIEFNXQ==?=
• Re: [Areivim] Are clones human?
• lo sassur
• Re: lo sassur
• Addictive Behavior

R Moshe Feldman wrote:
> As far as I know, everyone agrees that Shu"t Besamim Rosh was a forgery by
> R. Shaul Berlin...

See the thread titled "besamim rosh" which starts at
<http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol14/v14n017.shtml#05>.

Also, R' Eli Clark wrote back in v2n50:
> Regarding the pious fraud issue, I can think of another example of a
> work considered by many to be a literary fraud, which has nevertheless
> been treated as a respectable halakhic authority.  The Besamim Rosh,
> which purports to be a collection of teshuvot from the Rosh, is
> generally believed to be a hoax perpetrated by R. Shaul Berlin.
> Nevertheless, it is quoted by some Aharonim, primarily Sefardim.
> Indeed, I believe it was R. Ovadya who notes that, though the work may
> not be that of the Rosh, we can cite it as the work of R. Berlin, who
> was also a talmid hakham!

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger             The mind is a wonderful organ
micha@aishdas.org        for justifying decisions
http://www.aishdas.org   the heart already reached.
Fax: (270) 514-1507

From: "Yosef Gavriel & Shoshanah M. Bechhofer" <ygb@aishdas.org>
> I was asked by a talmid at Ohr Somayach to compile a list of
>distinctions between Chassidim and Misnagdim. I put it in table form, so
>I cannot reproduce it for Avodah. The list is too short and sharp to be
>accurate, but take it as a springboard....
>http://rygb.blogspot.com/2005/08/chassidim-and-misnagdim_01.html

Rather than give a list that really does not in my opinion tell one much,
I would suggest that you refer this talmid to Allan Nadler's "The Faith
of the Mithnagdim" and Elijah Judah Schochet's "The Hasidic Movement and
the Gaon of Vilna." These two books paint a detailed picture of the
fundamental differences between Chassidus and Misnagdus, and give the
reader a feel for the historical basis for the split between these groups.
(I am sure that there are other books that can also be suggested by
those on the list.)

As an educator I much prefer that a student finding the answers to
questions by spending time reading and hopefully thinking about things.
Giving him or her a list tends to downplay this and encourage "quick,
easy answers" to complex issues.

Yitzchok Levine 

Yitzchok Levine wrote:
> Rather than give a list that really does not in my opinion tell one 
> much, I would suggest that you refer this talmid to Allan Nadler's 
> "The Faith of the Mithnagdim" and Elijah Judah Schochet's "The Hasidic 
> Movement and the Gaon of Vilna."...
> As an educator I much prefer that a student finding the answers to 
> questions by spending time reading and hopefully thinking about 
> things. Giving him or her a list tends to downplay this and encourage 
> "quick, easy answers" to complex issues.

If one uses the list as a synopsis of issues that were discussed in
the past, or as a springboard for further discussion and exploration,
in my opinion the list is very useful.

I cannot agree with your recommendations. In good conscience I cannot
recommend books written by non-Orthodox writers for this purpose. Not
because they are biased or inaccurate. Rather, for us it is not
enough to have an intellectual command of the issues. We need to have
Avodas-Hashem-ramification command of them. As such, books written by
the academic community (the recent book on Reb Tzadok comes to mind)
and certainly the n-O academic community, are not acceptable.

I would recommend my "Forks" essay and its referenced sources as a good
start... :-)

YGB

At 02:17 PM 08/03/2005, Yosef Gavriel & Shoshanah M. Bechhofer wrote:
>I cannot agree with your recommendations. In good conscience I cannot 
>recommend books written by non-Orthodox writers for this purpose. Not 
>because they are biased or inaccurate. Rather, for us it is not enough to 
>have an intellectual command of the issues. We need to have 
>Avodas-Hashem-ramification command of them. As such, books written by the 
>academic community (the recent book on Reb Tzadok comes to mind) and 
>certainly the n-O academic community, are not acceptable.

First of all, who is the "us" that you refer to? Since I recommended these
books, I must not be one of "us," yet I consider myself to be a Torah Jew.

Please let me know how you determine "Avodas-Hashem-ramification command."
A list of specific criteria would be most helpful. Also, how will
you define the Orthodox academic community? Must the wife cover her
hair? Must they use only Chassidishe shechita and cholov Yisroel? And
on and on and on.

I am sure that you are aware that there are people in Brooklyn who
will not let their children marry Chassidim from families who use
the Eruv in Boro Park and Flatbush. Do those who use the Eruv have
"Avodas-Hashem-ramification command?"

I know for a fact that one of the authors of one of the books I suggested
is indeed Shomer Shabbos. He is not a Chosid, I can assure you! >:-}

These books contain large numbers of quotes that are relevant to the topic
in question. To me this makes them valuable resources for understanding
this topic.

Yitzchok Levine

From: Elozor Reich
> The issur on going on Har Habayis is stated in the Rishonim and is a
> Chiyuv Kares according to the Rambam.

The issur that is discussed by the mefarshim is not for the entire Har
HaBayis.
The entire area within the "Kosel" walls is not the halachic Har HaBayis.

There was nothing irresponsible about this. There are areas within the
Kosel walls that people are allowed to walk.
As for the chiyuv kareiss, I'm sorry, please read his words before
accusing me of something incorrectly. The only part that is a chiyuv
kareis is the Azara area. Not only may a tameh mais go onto most of the
Har but a mais itself may be brought there.
This is learned from the fact that Yosef bones were next to Moshe's tent
(Machene Levia) in the midbar. Many people know where the boundaries are.
I'm sorry if you disagree but if you read the mefarshim closely you will
see that no one says that they entire area is assur.

Yes, there are preparations that one must go through first and if anyone
is interested they can find out where the boundaries are and what they
must do beforehand.

This is nothing new in Klal Yisrael.

brent kaufman

R' Micha Berger wrote <<< I'd like to add another nequdah to the
dialogue now. Mal'achim have no bechirah chafshi. Is anything they do
not compelled? Is there a difference between a request and compulsion
since they can't, in truth, decide otherwise than they did? >>>

Yes, there is a difference between a request and compulsion, since even if
they are compelled to act a certain way, I do not know what that way is.

Perhaps the mal'ach is compelled to grant me the bracha. And perhaps
the mal'ach is compelled to deny me the bracha. I don't know what the
odds are of getting the bracha by asking, but if I don't ask, my odds
are zero. In other words, by asking the mal'ach for a bracha, from my
perspective I am doing nothing more than allowing him that opportunity.

I concede the possibility that from the mal'ach's persepctive, once I
have asked him for the bracha he is now forced to give it. I do not know
whether or not that *possibility* is enough to define the situation as
kishuf, and I leave that to those who've learned this stuff deeper than
I have.

Akiva Miller

Yitzchok Levine wrote:
> First of all, who is the "us" that you refer to? Since I recommended these
>books, I must not be one of "us," yet I consider myself to be a Torah Jew.
...

I think the answers I would provide to RYL's questions are fairly 
obvious to Avodah subscribers.

Al kein yiheyu b'einechem k'illu hayisi portam... :-)

YGB

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

--Boundary_(ID_krEzsLxoiYtyhytCLwXo7g)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

"brent"  <mailto:fallingstar613@hotmail.com> fallingstar613@hotmail.com
wrote:
> if the PM/government have a din of melech, then isn't anyone that voices an
> objection to him considered 'moraid b'malchus'?

In the Israeli system, the prime minister is not sovereign, the
government is. Therefore, in Israel, the prime minister is not the
melech; the government is. Moreover, as Israel is a democracy, the system
of government includes participation by the citizenry. Such participation
is not limited to voting; expressions of popular will at all times are
integral to the success of a democracy. Therefore, citizens who strongly
express their opinions are participating in government, not undermining
it, and therefore should not be considered mored b'malchus.

If citizens legitimately feel that their prime minister is negligently
endangering the public good in order to avoid criminal prosecution, then
calling attention to this fact by labeling the P.M. a traitor is not
being mored b'malchus. Rather, the citizens are helping the malchus by
trying to remove an individual who is improperly using political power
for his own personal ends.

Of course, to the extent that a citizen knowingly negatively
overexaggerates his depiction of the P.M. or of the government, the
citizen may be mored b'malchus. For example, if a P.M., not influenced
by personal issues, truly believes that withdrawing from territory is
beneficial for the country, then it may be an act of rebellion to label
the P.M. a traitor (which, truly, is a very strong word). At most,
one can state that the P.M. is negligently endangering the welfare of
the people.

As to DLs who actively oppose the P.M. regarding Gaza: First, this
is not opposing a gzeiras ha'melech. Acts of protest are within the
democratic framework, and until the withdrawal actually occurs, the
democratic process encourages citizen participation so as to ensure that
governmental plans continue to be relevant to the changing reality.
Secondly, these DLs believe that the melech is violating the Torah.
As RAL noted in his article, halacha does not permit a melech to violate
the halacha, and citizens are supposed to refuse to aid the melech in
committing such a violation.

Kol tuv,
Moshe

In response to the legitimate complaint that I neglected Mussar, I 
have expanded the table. See:

<http://rygb.blogspot.com/2005/08/chassidim-misnagdim-and-now-mussar.html>

YGB

On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 11:05:48AM +1000, SBA wrote:
:> Is there a (Jewish) tradition for the concept of holiness in the mortal
:> relics of exceptional personalities?

: {from the top of my head..)
: "Likedoshim asher ba'aretz heimoh..."?

Not muchrach. The qedoshim could very well be a description of who was
buried, not their remains or relics.

-mi

>Is there a (Jewish) tradition for the concept of holiness in the mortal
>relics of exceptional personalities?

This might tie into the issue of whether tzaddikim are metamim or not.

Gil Student,          Yashar Books
Subscribe to "Sefer Ha-Hayim - Books for Life" Newsletter:
news, ideas, insights and special offers from Yashar Books
http://www.yasharbooks.com/Sub.html
mailto:Gil@YasharBooks.com

On Sun, Jul 31, 2005 at 09:59:27PM -0500, brent wrote:
: Where is there is source at all in Torah that considers this world good?
: It is called, "Emek HaBachah" (Valley of Tears), "Olam HaChoshech"
: (World of Darkness) and other such terms...

I have heard "olam hasheqer" but not "olam hachoshech". "Eimeq habakhah",
as in Lekha Dodi, is a term for galus.

In any case, what about "gam zu litovah" and "kol man de'avad Rachmanah,
letav avad"? Don't they describe every event in this world as good? (Albeit
not necessarily to our liking.)

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger             "And you shall love H' your G-d with your whole
micha@aishdas.org        heart, your entire soul, and all you own."
http://www.aishdas.org   Love is not two who look at each other,
Fax: (270) 514-1507      It is two who look in the same direction.

On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 05:17:38PM -0700, Mendel Breitstein wrote:
:> Rabbinically non-kosher food consumed b'heter would not induce timtum
:> halev according to either side of the chakira.

: I wanted to say that I truly enjoyed this chakirah. It strikes me, though,
: that there might also be the possibility that when G-d decreed pork to
: be not kosher, that this affected its ontological state regardless of
: whether or not eating it is necessary, and hence permissible.

To recast what I already wrote in (the other) RMB's terms:

Since "tzadiq gozeir ve'E-lokim meqayeim", it could very well be that
a rabbinic prohibition also causes ontological change. Thus, the timtum
haleiv could be caused by the etzem davar (even when eaten for piqu'ach
nefesh and one holds "dechuyah") AND apply to issurim derabanan.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger             "Fortunate indeed, is the man who takes
micha@aishdas.org        exactly the right measure of himself,  and
http://www.aishdas.org   holds a just balance between what he can
Fax: (270) 514-1507      acquire and what he can use." - Peter Latham

From: Eli Turkel <>
> One of my father's favorite bed time stories was about how Dovid (yet
> to become King) was saved from capture by hiding in a cave and a spider
> weaving a web to made it look uninhabited.
> As a result, we try not to kill spiders - a lesson in hakoras hatov.
> Any know of a "mekor" for the story and its lesson?

I looked it up many years for an article I wrote. Unfortunately I am
on travel. What I do remember is that this is from a medrash that was
authored in medieval times.

I saw the story [without the 'hakoras hatov' bit] quoted beshem "Otzar
Midroshim".

The Beer Heitev OC 250:1 says to rid homes of spider webs on Erev Shabbos.
Darkei Chaim veSholom writes about how the Munkatcher rav z'l used to
personally kill spiders [and explains it al pi kabolo etc]

SBA 

From: Gil Student <>
> The Mishnah (Sotah 20a) quotes R. Eliezer who states that one who
> teaches his daughter Torah is as if he had taught her tiflus (I'll
> leave that untranslated and we can just assume that it is a bad
> thing). The Shulhan Arukh (Yoreh De'ah 246:6) quotes this law and
> [ Much more can be found at
> <http://hirhurim.blogspot.com/2005/08/women-learning-gemara.html> -mi]

Much, MUCH more can be found in the 3rd part of Vayoel Moshe - "Maamar
Loshon Hakodesh" - which is actually based on a teshuva that the SR z'l
wrote to Rav Pinchos Hirshprung zt'l of Montreal.

Is it really possible to debate and discuss this topic seriously without
studying these 50 [large] pages quoting Shas and Poskim? I doubt it.

[Quoting a few lines from the Satmar-sympathetic Frumteens moderator
doesn't count.]

SBA 

On Tue, Aug 02, 2005 at 04:02:56AM -0700, Gil Student wrote:
: The following are the words of R. Yisrael Meir Kagan, the Hafetz Hayim
: (Likkutei Halakhos, Sotah p. 21):
:     It would appear that all this was intended for earlier generations
:     when everyone dwelt in the place of their familial ancestral home
:     and ancestral tradition was very powerful among all to follow the
:     path of their fathers... under such circumstances we could maintain
:     that a woman not study Torah and, for guidance, rely on her righteous
:     parents, but presently, due to our myriad sins, ancestral tradition
:     has become exceptionally weak...

Although the CC refers to derekh avos, I find this poetically neat.

Relying on upbringing and environment is "'toras imekha' -- al tiqri
'imekha' ela 'umaskha'". IOW, the primary mode for relaying this kind
of tradition was from one's mother. So of course, as that system fails,
the feminine shalsheles falters as few people stay home and fewer homes
are shomerei Torah umitzvos r"l, the need is to shift to traditionally
masculine modes of transmission.

-mi

On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 12:46:04AM -0700, Gil Student wrote:
:    Regarding smoking marijuana, R. Moshe Feinstein (Iggeros Moshe, Yoreh
:    De'ah 3:35) wrote:
:      It causes a great desire--greater than the desire for food and
:      similar items that are necessary for one to live--and some people
:      will not be able to resist this temptation. This falls under the
:      serious prohibition mentioned regarding the "rebellious son,"...
...
:    It seems that R. Feinstein is of the view that one may not
:    intentionally make oneself addicted to a substance.
:    However, in his responsa regarding smoking cigarettes (Iggeros Moshe,
:    Orah Hayim 2:49, Hoshen Mishpat 2:76), R. Feinstein does not once
:    mention addiction when, to my knowledge, cigarettes are more addictive
:    than marijuana. What's the difference? ...

Marijauna inteferes with proper bekhirah. It's far more mind altering
than cigarettes. Coffee might be a closer she'eilah, but it too is not
in that league of psychotropic effects.

A- That interferes with avodas Hashem in a way that cigarettes
don't. However, that's not the point that RMF raises, rather

B- it creates a desire "greater than the desire for food". And thus,
greater than the desire to which the ben sorer bows. Although technically
nicotine is more addictive, you don't find too many smokers who choose
to starve rather to get the next cigarette.

The problem is in the word "more". Nicotine is more likely to cause an
addiction, not a more intense addiction. Also, the statement is only
about the brain chemistry of addiction, not the psychological attraction
developed for an altered state beyond the biology.

Tangent on a more positive subject: I noticed the Orechos Tzadiqim is
careful to measure every middah in the same two dimensions: frequency
and intensity. Saying someone is generous can mean he gives frequently,
when he gives he gives a lot, or both. Similarly, a bad temper can be
either someone who often gets angry, someone who gets angry rarely but
really explodes, or r"l someone who explodes often. They're not entirely
related axis.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger             Spirituality is like a bird: if you tighten
micha@aishdas.org        your grip on it, it chokes; slacken your grip,
http://www.aishdas.org   and it flies away.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            - Rav Yisrael Salanter

Mendel Breitstein <> wrote:
> I'm not sure that this is really analogous. I know that someone pointed
> out the difference between a living tzadik praying on your behalf vs. a
> deceased one. Even if you say they are similar, the Torah has given the
> c.g. a unique status to represent us. Is there any obligation to believe
> that supplicating Rachel emainu is appropriate?

From: "Gershon Dubin" <>
> Yirmiyahu hanavi's description of Rochel Imenu crying for her children,
> and many midrashim about the Avos at the time of the churban, seem to
> indicate that this is an idea which is quite old and well established.

And earlier still, Kolev ben Yefuneh temporarily separating from the
Meraglim to davven at the Me'oras Hamachpela.

SBA

From: "Gershon Dubin" <>
: Yirmiyahu hanavi's description of Rochel Imenu crying for her children,
: and many midrashim about the Avos at the time of the churban, seem to
: indicate that this is an idea which is quite old and well established.

In Yirmiyahu, HQBH asks the avos to cry for His people. Not a raayah
that people are supposed to approach the avos.

On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 01:35:46AM +1000, SBA wrote:
: And earlier still, Kolev ben Yefuneh temporarily separating from the
: Meraglim to davven at the Me'oras Hamachpela.

The Gra doesn't do away with the notion of davening at a qever. Rather,
he says it's a way to invoke their zechus, and to be inspired to greater
kavanah. But when there, the Gra assurs directing one's requrests at
the meis.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 Time flies...
micha@aishdas.org                    ... but you're the pilot.
http://www.aishdas.org                       - R' Zelig Pliskin
Fax: (270) 514-1507      

Date: 	Thu, 4 Aug 2005 02:06:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: 	Anonymous <anonymous-comment@blogger.com>
To: 	ygb@aishdas.org

Hi,

 From a chasidic perspective, the main thrust of the Torah, and
therefore one's efforts, is to break through to d'vekus, as you have
written. Chasidus does not see itself as innovating this, merely using a
different approach to achieve it, since in the generations before the Baal
Shem Tov most of those that were learning were not getting the required
effect from their Torah. The Piasezno Rebbe writes ~in the 1920's that the
misnagdim have forgotten that the purpose of learning is to achieve this
shift of perception, so reducing learning to an intellectual activity
as you document. Essentially, the misnagdim have fallen into the trap
of the maskilim - thinking that there is no alternate reality out there
to tap. Intellectual activity is the tehom of esov - you go endlessly
around in logical circles.
 
My shver z'l told me that in Poland before the war there were 80 Rebbes 
with Ruach haKodesh. It seems to me that post-war chasidim have also 
forgotten that it is about getting somewhere, although there are still 
more than a few Rebbes who are clearly there. My feeling is that having 
succeeded in re-establishing themselves as a social force, the next task 
for chasidus is to produce a generation of chasidim that are also baalei 
hasogo.

 --

My response:

An extremely important comment.

My Belzer chevrusa (we learn "Sidduro shel Shabbos" together) explained
to me recently that the Chassidim themselves recognize that the primary
role of Rebbes in our day is social cohesion as opposed to hadrachah in
Avodas Hashem and in Dveykus. I do not see how the difficult change-over
to the "next task" can be accomplished, but it will be truly wonderful
if and when it does!

YGB

RELPhMinden wrote to Areivim about <http://tinyurl.com/afovz> (from
Haaretz.com):
> Interesting arguments about
> - Are clones human?
> - Do they have a soul?
> - Is it permitted to kill them?
> - Who's the father?

I dunno about the last question. Halachically, one has to ask who is
the mother -- the genetic mother or the one who carried the fetus.

However, I would think the other three are non-starters. A clone is an
identical twin who was born significantly after the first one. With
greater variation in personality as one finds in identical twins, as
there is a far greater difference in environment.

Rabbi Moshe Botschko and R' Bleich may soon face the possibility of having
to say that a unique homoe sapien is without soul. Rav Shelomo Aviner
speaks of the ability of speech -- which implies a "ru'ach memalela" --
and yet doesn't reach that conclusion.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger             For a mitzvah is a lamp,
micha@aishdas.org        And the Torah, its light.
http://www.aishdas.org                   - based on Mishlei 6:2
Fax: (270) 514-1507

I have a question. I deal with messianic Jews (the xian kind) and often
the question of the validity of the Oral Torah comes up. (They do not
believe in it.) I have often shown them that there is a command to obey
Rabbinic laws by showing them the issur of "Lo Sassur" (Dev. 17-8)

However, they often reply that the pasukim do not say anything about
Rabbinic laws and that the Torah is only speaking of a case in which a
controversy or dispute arises, (dam l'dam, din l'din, nega l'nega...)
AND that there is no implication of a Sanhedrin of Elders but rather
"priests and Levites and A judge".

 From here there is no implication that they have the authority to
create Rabbinical gezeiros, but rather only rule on s'feikos. Also,
this pasuk implies that Levi'im (that aren't part of the Sanhedrin)
have the same authority as a Shofet, not even a melech is mentioned,
let alone 70 Elders.

I've stopped using this as a response because it seems logical and I
have no response to their objection.

Can anyone shed some light onto this?

brent kaufman

On Fri, Aug 05, 2005 at 01:01:50AM -0500, brent wrote:
:                 I have often shown them that there is a command to obey
: Rabbinic laws by showing them the issur of "Lo Sassur" (Dev. 17-8)

: However, they often reply that the pasukim do not say anything about
: Rabbinic laws and that the Torah is only speaking of a case in which a
: controversy or dispute arises, (dam l'dam, din l'din, nega l'nega...)

That's because they're using a translation, and therefore don't know
the real meaning of the word "yorukha" (as in "hora'ah").

: AND that there is no implication of a Sanhedrin of Elders but rather
: "priests and Levites and A judge".

Isn't "the judge which you will have in those days" a little more than
an implication? And what about the sarim instituted in parashas Yisro? Or
the 70 zeqeinim?

:-)BBii!
-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 Life is complex.
micha@aishdas.org                Decisions are complex.
http://www.aishdas.org               The Torah is complex.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                                - R' Binyamin Hecht

From: Gil Student <simcha365@hotmail.com>
> Is it permissible to become addicted to something?

> Regarding smoking marijuana, R. Moshe Feinstein (Iggeros Moshe</i>,
> Yoreh De'ah 3:35) wrote:....

I'm not sure what he (R. Moshe) meant by this because marijuana is only
as addictive as anything that is "psychologically" addictive. It isn't
physically addictive - a very strong and distinct difference. If marijuana
is considered addictive for halachic reasons, then so too are excercise,
sugar, sex... No one, I mean no one, choses to become addicted. So
what is the question? Should we abstain from marijuana because it may
possibly lead to addiction (and that is 'only' in extreme cases)? If so
then we should abstain from excercise, sugar, sex... because they may
lead to addiction. And they are all permitted activities, and the point
at which a person becomes an addict is impossible to determine before
arriving there. Cigarettes and alcohol have never been prohibited by
mainstream poskim and they are much more dangerous to one's health and
are physically addictive.

What would the issur be? "Tishmor es nafshecha? That is very subjective.
Some people can smoke their entire lives and live long and healthy
lives while others get sick from it. Rishonim speak of smoking hashish
(a form of marijuana residue). (I heard R. Berel Wein quote a Rishon on
the matter.)

Is a person with OCD a misasek regarding his/her addictions/obsessions?
Would eating disorders become issurim instead of illnesses? They are
addictions.

brent kaufman

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


[ 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         ]