Avodah Mailing List

Volume 15 : Number 086

Sunday, October 2 2005

• RE: yom kippur vs tisha ba-av
• hiskashrus
• Re: Fish and Meat
• Re: how to proceed
• Re: Fish and Meat
• Re: Halakhah and emotions
• Shemona Perakim ch. 6
• Re: Chofetz Chaim - Inyone Deyomeh
• RE: hiskashrus
• Re: fish and meat
• Re: Halakhah and emotions
• Rav JB Soloveitchik and Arabs as "Amalek"
• Selichos before Rosh Hashana
• Luach minhogei beis Haknesses livnei Ashkenaz - some thoughts
• statistics
• torah lo ba'shamayin he
• RE: torah lo ba'shamayin he
• Re: Shu"t Min Hashamayim
• Re: torah lo ba'shamayin he
• Re: statistics
• Re: yom kippur vs tisha ba-av

On September 29, 2005, Eli Turkel asked:
> In today's selichot (ashkenaz) we mourn the loss of the bet hamikdash and
> the antonement we got through the sacrifices that is no longer available.
> On Yom kippur after the avodah there is (ashkenaz) again the famous
> piyut of mareh cohen with a similar theme.

> However, in the tisha ba-av selichot there is almost no mention of the
> loss of korbanot and kapparah because of the destruction of the Temple
> why?

The yomim noraim are ymey rachamim, ymei mechila, selicha v'kapara.
Concordantly, we bemoan the loss of the korbanos which afforded us
such a wonderful opportunity for kapara. OTOH, tisha b'av is a time of
mourning. We don't bemoan the loss of the beis hamikdash on TB because
of what it afforded us per se. We mourn the BH because its destruction
is a symbol of our spiritual churban, our sins.

Simcha Coffer

can any one comment if this is mainly a chassidic idea , or an ideal
accross yiddishkeit

On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 01:18:46 -0400 "Moshe Y. Gluck"
<mslatfatf@access4less.net> writes:
<<If so, why do people eat at tables that have fish and meat together?
Just about every Kiddush seems to have herring and cholent.>>

As I recall, there is no sakana if they are not cooked together (as in,
dagim she'alu bike'ara shel basar).

Gershon
gershon.dubin@juno.com

 "Rivka S" <rivkas@thejnet.com> Wrote:
>R' Gershon Seif wrote:
>>First he would touch his shoes and then he would wash. ... But I never saw
>>any Rosh Yeshiva or any FFB doing or considering such a thing..

>The FFB's in my family do this after they have washed & said Asher Yotzar,
>and are now going to wash for Netilas Yodayim for bread. Scratching the
>head is another alternative used by the more discreet.

There is such a minhag by some (among others the Klausenburger Rav zt"l)
based on the Shelah (Shaar Ha'osiyos Kedushas Ha'achila 82).

The Shelah writes, my minhag is to use the bathroom before every se'uda,
and wash and say asher yatzar etc., then [I would] touch my body in
order for the hands to be mechuyov netilah.

This Shelah is alluded to in MA and in MB.

This issue is discussed at length in Shulchan Aruch OC 165:1. The MB
writes that one coming out of the bathroom, should rinse his hands
slightly just for cleanliness and then should wash the regular full
netilah. See MB s"k 2 for important halachos regarding one who wants to
wash for bread after using the bathroom.

 - Avigdor Feldstein

R' Moshe Y. Gluck Wrote:
>We all know that one may not eat at a table with meat and milk on it. We
>also all know that chamira sakanta mei'isura. We also know that eating fish
>and meat together is a sakana. If so, why do people eat at tables that have
>fish and meat together? Just about every Kiddush seems to have herring and
>cholent.

There is a discussion on this issue in the poskim.

The Kaf Hachayim 116:35 is machmir that a heker should be present, but
the Shevet Halevi 6:111 concludes that the minhag ha'olaom was always
to be meikel in this. See also Darkei Tshuva YD 116:13.

KT
 - Avigdor Feldstein

On Mon, Sep 26, 2005 at 06:31:24PM +0000, Elazar M. Teitz wrote:
:> WRT chuqim, is in the Rambam (8 Peraqim, pereq 6), but I doubt the
:> [g]emara said it, because I believe this is where Mussar diverges from
:> he Rambam. (Whereas diverging from Shas is an unrealistic assumption.)

: It's in the Safra in K'doshim, on the pasuk "Va'avdil eschem min ha'amim
: lih'yos li" (20:26), and is quoted there by Rashi.

While on his way to shul one morning this week, RZLampel told me that
the difficulty that lead me to the wrong conclusion is addressed in
Or Yisrael. If anyone can point me to where RYS discusses this issue,
I would be greateful.

:-)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: (270) 514-1507      

> It should also be remembered that it is pshat in the Shmona prakim, as well
> as elsewhere, that the rambam viewed most of hilchot arayot (whether this
> also applied to MZ can be debated, but I think is also true) as hukkim -
> comparable to not eating hazir - which is why the gmara could describe
> amoraim who suffered temptation of arayot (and overcame them) - because there
> is nothing intrinsically wrong about arayot except that hashem forbade them,
> while hilchot mamonot is (according to the rambam) something that no good
> person should be tempted to transgress...

Please note that Rambam does NOT here accept the distinction between
"hukkim" and "mishpatim." He say that this distinction is held by those
who have succumbed to the "illness of the Kalam."

Rambam here is not talking about why G-d forbade certain actions (taamei
ha- mitzvot). He is discussing whether there is anything wrong in having
a desire for something prohibited. It just happens that the desires the
Rambam defines as unhealthy overlap with the actions that the Kalamist
(e.g. Saadia) consider rationally prohibited, and the desires that are
not inherently wrong correspond to the so-called hukkim.

This is a crucial point, though it does not affect Meir Shinnar's argument
about sexual desire. (To the contrary, even if prohibiting certain sexual
acts belongs to "mishpatim" one may still maintain that the temptation
to violate them is not itself wrong as would be sadism or cruelty.

On Mon, Sep 26, 2005 at 11:13:18PM +1000, SBA wrote:
: OTOH, there are other mitzvos, for which a person can receive continuing
: sechar - as time goes on - even well after his has passed on from
: this world.

The same idea is involved in saying qaddish. The hashpa'ah he had on
the person who says qaddish is paying dividend collected after petirah.

But does this bother anyone else?

After all, the same ma'aseh can have grossly different impact depending
on things that could happen outside of his control. Usually we say the
intent is the main thing. However, here the CC is saying that if someone
is meqareiv another who r"l dies in a car crash a year after the rebbe's
petirah, the rebbe's sechar is far far less than if the car missed and
he lived on to marry and have generation after generation of ehrlicher
shomerei Torah umitzvos.

Not lefum tza'arah, but according to success!

:-)BBii!
-mi

-- 
Micha Berger             When a king dies, his power ends,
micha@aishdas.org        but when a prophet dies, his influence is just
http://www.aishdas.org   beginning.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                    - Soren Kierkegaard

From Newman,Saul Z
> can any one comment if this is mainly a chassidic idea , or an ideal
> accross yiddishkeit

It is definitely across the board but not as far as the Noam Elimelech and
Chabad take it. It's erev Shabbos and I don't have time to "profess" but
if the topic picks up, I have a ton of material to share in the future.

Good Shabbos
Simcha Coffer

In  Areivim Digest V15 #345 dated 9/30/2005  RSM writes:
>Someone at the table, whom I don't know,
>said that it's not  enought to drink just "something", but it has to be

>something alchoholic. We smiled, thinking he was joking,
>but he insisted, to our amazement, that he  was perfectly serious, and that's
>what he was taught. ...
>but I have always wondered
>if there is in fact a halachic (or  minhagic) basis for this idea.  Has
>anyone ever heard such a  concept?

I think the m'kor for this minhag is, since you have to drink something
between fish and meat (kinuach v'hadacha). Now water isn't (for everyone)
an option since water after fish is (to some) a sakanah (see tosfos
in Moed Katan 11a), and coke or orange juice probably wasn't always
available in the shtetlach, mashkeh hamshaker (wine or yayin saraf)
was therefore the default choice.

Either way, if you have to drink a minimal amount of any mashkeh, why
shouldn't it be something on which you can vinch another yid lechayim?

KvCT and Gut Shabbos
 - Avigdor Feldstein

Micha Berger wrote:
>On Mon, Sep 26, 2005 at 06:31:24PM +0000, Elazar M. Teitz wrote:
>:> WRT chuqim, is in the Rambam (8 Peraqim, pereq 6), but I doubt the
>:> [g]emara said it, because I believe this is where Mussar diverges from
>:> he Rambam. (Whereas diverging from Shas is an unrealistic assumption.)

>: It's in the Safra in K'doshim, on the pasuk "Va'avdil eschem min ha'amim
>: lih'yos li" (20:26), and is quoted there by Rashi.

>While on his way to shul one morning this week, RZLampel told me that
>the difficulty that lead me to the wrong conclusion is addressed in
>Or Yisrael. If anyone can point me to where RYS discusses this issue,
>I would be greateful.

The Ohr Yisroel HaMeforesh has one citation to Shemona Perakim - Chalek 
I Simon 30 page 262 in this edition.

The Mossad HaRav Kook editon of Ish HaEmunah includes Kol Dodi Dofek
and on page 101, RJB writes [my translation YM:
    "the evil machinations of the Arabs are not directed only towards
    the political independence [of the state of Israel] but to the very
    existential essence of the Jewish community in toto. They aspire to
    destroy, *chaliliah*, the *Yishuv*, from man to woman, from child to
    infant, from bull to sheep. At one of the assemblies of the Mizrachi,
    I said in the name of my father, my teacher z"l, that the portion
    in the Torah "Hashem wages war against Amalek from generation
    to generation" is not limited in its community application as a
    *milchemet mitzva* to a certain race, but is inclusive regarding the
    obligation of rising up against any nation or group that is infused
    with irrational [crazed?] hatred, and directs its hate against
    *Knesset Yisrael* ...In the 1930s and 1940s, this role was filled by
    the Nazis and Hitler at their head. They were Amaleks, representatives
    of the pathological animosity of the last period. Today, the masses
    of Nasser and the Mufti are substituting for them."

Does anyone know of any discussions, debates, oppositions, clarifications
or reconsiderations of his opinion?


[Email #2 -mi]

In part, my inquiry stems from the fact that in this source:
 Hamaayan / The Torah Spring
Edited by Shlomo Katz Ki Seitzei Volume XII, Number 45
14 Elul 5758
September 5, 1998
<http://www.torah.org/learning/hamaayan/5758/kiseitzei.html?print=3D1.
he selectively notes that "R' Joseph B. Soloveitchik z"l explained that
"Amalek" does refers not only to the ancient nation by that name but to
any nation which adheres to the philosophy of Amalek and attacks Jews
for no reason other than the fact that they are Jews. In our own times,
R' Soloveitchik said, Nazi Germany was a manifestation of Amalek."

He leaves out the very next sentence in the article which I think strange
unless the Rav himself had written a retraction.

--
Yisrael Medad
Shiloh
Israel

I've been trying to understand a bit of the history of the development
of saying selichos, specifically the Ashkenazic practice of beginning
selichos several days before Rosh Hashana.

MB 581:6 says "Many have the minhag to fast for ten days including YK,
but there are always 4 days missing from RH to YK on which they can't
fast, namely two days of RH and Shabbos Shuva and Erev YK. Therefore,
they have to make up four days before RH."

I'm trying to understand where the concept of fasting for ten days
came from.

Well, obviously, the idea of "ten days" came from the Aseres Yemei
Teshuva, but whence the idea that the fasting *has* to be for *ten*
days, or that days before RH can compensate for them?

My question might be more easily seen if I begin with a *false*
description of how this minhag developed: In this false scenario, a
group of people felt it would be appropriate to observe the Aseres Yemei
Teshuva with fasting and tefilos, and so did they do, for the entire ten
days. It was later brought to their attention that they should not fast
on Shabbos or Erev Yom Kippur or the two days of Rosh Hashana. Therefore,
to preserve their practice of ten days of fasting, they decided to fast
each year beginning (at least) four days before Rosh Hashana.

Clearly, the above is ridiculous. No one would suggest fasting on Shabbos
Shuva or Erev Yom Kippur. But if so, wouldn't the initial impetus simply
have been to fast on the six middle days of the Aseres Yemei Teshuva?

In other words, why is any importance attached to this idea of having
the fasting/selichos for davka ten days, even in the case where some of
those days are prior to Rosh Hashana?

Compare: Do we blow the shofar for the month of Elul, or do we blow it for
29 days before Rosh Hashana? If there is some significance to the 29-day
period, then we should actually begin blowing the shofar at the end of
Menachem Av, to make up for the five days in Elul when it is skipped (five
Sabbaths and Erev Rosh Hashana). But we don't begin blowing the shofar
until Elul 1, and so too Ashkenazim ought to begin selichos in Tishre.

I just saw the Shaar Hatziyun 581:1, who says that someone who does fast
on the two days of Rosh Hashana only needs *two* days of fasting prior
to the Aseres Yemei Teshuva, because he will in fact be fasting on 8 of
them. This reinforces my observation that there seems to be something
important about fasting for ten days, and I'm still hoping to be shown how
it differs from the idea of having exactly 29 days of blowing the shofar.

Akiva Miller

I just got the new editions (two this year, for EY and the diaspora,
37 & 38 single spaced pages respectively) of the 'Luach Minhogei Beis
Haknesses Livnei Ashkenaz - luach liShabbosos uMoadei hashono' for 5766
from Machon Moreshes Ashkenaz (MMA) of Bnei Brak a few days back and
would like to share some thoughts about it (by the way, free *pdf copies
are available - just drop me a line, I will relay your request to the
American friends of MMA, as per their request, and you will get it).

Among the things that I find interesting about it are that it covers
in detail things that are not commonly covered elsewhere - such as
piyyutim. For example, it tells you which 'ofan' or 'zulas' to say on
a particular Shabbos (not that I necessarily follow that - as not all
such things are part of my personal tradition - but it's still nice
to see that some people are keeping up these venerable minhogim and
take piyyutim seriously). Another example is that many times it says
which niggun to use for certain parts of the davening. Such attention
to detail is impressive. In an age when many just want to 'daven up'
the davening and get through it quickly, while others just want to be
able to sing whatever niggun they wish for anything, this attitude of
staunch adherence to mesora is refreshing.

Additionally, some of the minhogim covered in the luach have, over
time, lapsed among many communities and have been almost forgotten. In
other cases, they have evolved or mutated into different forms than
they originally took. On the other hand, often in Ashkenaz (Germany)
frum circles, where Yekke conservatism and eye to detail prevailed, the
ancient forms were better preserved than elsewhere. A look at the luach
can give one a glimpse of how their ancestors may have worshipped hundreds
of years ago. It can also sometimes illuminate things that seem unclear,
by providing some background and context in which to place minhogim of
other communities and traditions.

The luach was originally made for the Shul of Rav Hamburger shlit"a
and allied congregations in Eretz Yisroel. In the case where there were
variant German-Jewish traditions, on the advice of Rav Shimon Schwab z"l,
it tries to follow the minhag which is most faithful to ancient Ashkenazic
custom (minhag Reinus), and go according to what is found in sources of
rishonim. In many cases this means following minhag Frankfurt, a kehillah
which was a leader in adhering steadfastly to the ancient minhag Ashkenaz,
but there are some cases where other, non-Frankfurt, customs are preferred
(the previous was communicated to me by Rav Hamburger last year).

Anyway, due to the above, I think that it is of significant interest,
and something to be thankful for, to people from varying backgrounds,
who want to learn more about Ashkenazic minhogim.

Mordechai

According to those shitot that every human (at least) is governed
strictly by his mitzvot vs sins how does one account for the use od
statistics to measure the influence of almost everything on mortality
rates. This implies that smoking/eating too much and all sort of other
habits decreases ones expected life span independent of mitzvot.

Note that according to those shitot that only special tzaddkikim are
exempt from natural law this presents no difficulty. By the nature of
statistics there are exceptions to everything, So an individual that
smokes 5 packs every day and lives to 120 would present no special
difficulties.

I know of no statistical data for specific regions like Bnei Brak.
However, having talked to doctors in Israeli hospitals that service the
religious communties they would be shocked if there is any significant
differences in the statistics of Bnei Brak vs Tel Aviv that is not
accounted for by natural means (different eating habits etc)

shana tova
--
Eli Turkel

so I was going through some stuff on this week's parsha, and I noticed
this

-----
"It [the Torah] is not in the Heavens."  (30:12)

 From this verse, Chazal learn that once the Torah was "sealed" at the
end of Moshe's life, no prophet may change it. G-d has given the Torah to
us to interpret according to the rules that the Torah itself contains,
and even if He would tell us how to act, we would not listen. Rather,
we base our actions only on the Torah, as interpreted by the sages. (See
Bava Metzia 59b and Temurah 16a)

Yet, we find instances where sages consulted angels regarding the proper
halachic decision. R' Yaakov of Marvege, a 12th century Tosafist, did
so regularly, and composed the work She'eilot Uteshuvot Min Hashamayim
("Responsa from Heaven"). Indeed, this work is quoted by poskim and
followed! How is this consistent with the rule: "It is not in the
Heavens."

R' Chaim Yosef David Azulai z"l ("Chida"; 1724-1806) explains that
the Heavens may be consulted when the gemara has discussed a question
and left it unanswered. In such a case, there is no way that we can be
expected to resolve the matter using our own intellectual abilities.
(Shem Hagedolim: Erech R' Yaakov Hechassid)
-----

does anyone know anything about the sefer in the middle paragraph?

R' Shaya Potter:
> Yet, we find instances where sages consulted angels regarding the proper
> halachic decision. R' Yaakov of Marvege, a 12th century Tosafist, did
> so regularly, and composed the work She'eilot Uteshuvot Min Hashamayim
> ("Responsa from Heaven"). Indeed, this work is quoted by poskim and
> followed! How is this consistent with the rule: "It is not in the
> Heavens."
<snip>
> does anyone know anything about the sefer in the middle paragraph?

Yes, I have a copy. It has been republished by Mossad HaRav Kook, and
is fascinating. Any good sized seforim store should have it.

KT,
MYG

> "It [the Torah] is not in the Heavens."  (30:12)

> From this verse, Chazal learn that once the Torah was "sealed" at the
> end of Moshe's life, no prophet may change it.

Nope.  We learn that from "vezot hatorah".

> Yet, we find instances where sages consulted angels regarding the proper
> halachic decision. R' Yaakov of Marvege, a 12th century Tosafist, did so
> regularly, and composed the work She'eilot Uteshuvot Min Hashamayim
> ("Responsa from Heaven"). Indeed, this work is quoted by poskim and
> followed! 

AFAIK, Shu"t Min Hashamayim is *not* "followed", i.e. regarded as a
source for final psak, precisely because "lo bashamayim hi". It's an
important sefer, and is indeed quoted in halachic discussion, but only
as a source for information and arguments that can help earthly poskim
to decide the halacha.

-- 
Zev Sero
zev@sero.name

Shaya Potter wrote:
>Yet, we find instances where sages consulted angels regarding the proper
>halachic decision. R' Yaakov of Marvege, a 12th century Tosafist, did
>so regularly, and composed the work She'eilot Uteshuvot Min Hashamayim
>("Responsa from Heaven"). Indeed, this work is quoted by poskim and
>followed! How is this consistent with the rule: "It is not in the
>Heavens."

>does anyone know anything about the sefer in the middle paragraph?

The Mossad Rav Kook edition of this sefer has an extensive discussion of 
this issue by R' Reuven Margolis

Daniel Eidensohn

Eli Turkel wrote:
>According to those shitot that every human (at least) is governed
>strictly by his mitzvot vs sins how does one account for the use od
>statistics to measure the influence of almost everything on mortality
>rates. This implies that smoking/eating too much and all sort of other
>habits decreases ones expected life span independent of mitzvot.

>Note that according to those shitot that only special tzaddkikim are
>exempt from natural law this presents no difficulty. By the nature of
>statistics there are exceptions to everything, So an individual that
>smokes 5 packs every day and lives to 120 would present no special
>difficulties.

The following sources indicate that the judgement of Rosh HaShanna is 
not absolute and mechanical. Rather ones health and success is the 
result of a number of natural factors interacting with this judgment.

Akeidas Yitzchok(#67): The righteous Jewsג€"whether they have not 
committed a sin which is punishable by death or whether they have sinned 
but they have merit which protects them or they have repentedג€"all of 
them are judged immediately for life on Rosh HaShanna. In contrast those 
who have committed sins which are punishable by death and haven't 
repented or have merit which protects themג€"are sentenced to physical 
death which will atone for their sins. Nonetheless they will still merit 
the World to Come.... When it says that the completely wicked are 
sentenced to deathג€"it doesn't mean that they will die immediately.... 
Rather immediately the Divine protection and providence is removed from 
them and they are left to whatever harmful forces they encounter and 
then they will die. If they don't encounter any harmful forces then G-d 
will send His angel to take his life during the year...

Maharal(Rosh HaShanna 16b page 110): The explanation that the complete
tzadik is written for life is that everything concerning him is for
life even if the mazel is for death...he will be guarded against the
chance causes of death by G-d...Concerning the wicked it is the opposite
even his mazel is for life G-d writes him for death. That means G-d
leaves him exposed to chance causes of death. Death is not inevitable
because the mazel might be so strong that it will guard him but it is
a strong possibility. That is why Chazal tell us that one should not
travel with a rasha because he is accompanied by the angelic agents of
destruction...however there are times that he doesn't actually die...This
is expressed by Dovid (Shmuel I 26) that death is divided into 3 causes 1)
G-d directly causes 2) natural 3) chance...

 Meiri(Nedarim 49b): Even though a person is judged on Rosh Hashanah
concerning life and death, suffering and profitג€"he should nonetheless
not give up daily prayer and repentance. That is because the decree of
Rosh HaShanna can be nullified by repentance and proper prayer. The basis
for hope is even stronger according to those sages who say in fact that
man is judged every day and not just once a year. Both positions are true
for those who have understanding. Even though the gemora implies that
there is an irreconcilable dispute on the issueג€""and today we pray
for the sick because we follow the opinion of R' Yossi that a person
is judged every day while the Sages say that a person is judged only
on Rosh HaShanna and therefore it is too late to pray." In fact under
certain circumstances everyone would agree to pray for the sick because
we know that "even when the sword is in contact with a person's neck
he should not refrain from prayer to help."

 Rosh HaShanna (16a): Whose authority do we rely on to pray for the
sick? We rely on R' Yossi who says that a person is judged everyday
and not just on Rosh HaShanna. Alternatively you can say we accept the
view of the Rabbis that health was determined on Rosh HaShanna. However
we also accept the view of R' Yitzchak prayer is good whether before
the decree is pronounced or afterwards.

 Tosfos (Rosh HaShanna 16a): On whose authority do we rely on to pray
for the sick? Only R' Yossi. But don't the rabbonim also pray for
the sick and other things in the Amida? Furthermore R' Yehudah who
says here a person's future is determined on Yom Kippur says elsewhere
(Shabbos 12b) that when one visits the sick that it is important to pray
for their recovery. Rabbeinu Tam answers that one should not pray that
he won't become sick except according to R' Yossi. However everyone
agrees that it is possible to pray to recover. That is because the time
of sickness is decreed on Rosh HaShanna but not the time of recovery. The
problem with prayer for rain can be answered that the prayer is not for
more rain but that the rain that was decreed should fall at the most 
advantageous time.*ג€¦ *Alternatively the inability to pray after Yom 
Kippur is only for private pray but collective pray still works to 
nullify the Divine decree. Thus Rג€™ Yehudaג€™s prayer for the sick can be 
understood as collective prayer.

 Igros Moshe (O.H. 1:111): Not only is a person allowed but in fact is
obligated to have a job to provide his livelihood. It is prohibited for
a person to say that even if he does nothing that G-d will provide his
livelihood in some manner. How does he know that he has the merit for a
miracle aside from the fact that it is prohibited for a person to rely
on a miracle even if he has the merit? This prohibition of praying for a
miracles is stated clearly in Berachos (60) concerning praying that one's
pregnant wife should give birth to a boy. The gemora raises a question
from the fact that Leah prayed that she have a girl. Therefore even
Leahג€"one of the Matriarchs who surely merited miraclesג€"apparently
should not have prayed for a miracle. The gemora according to the
first answer indicates that Leah was an exception and that she can
not be emulated. According to the second answer since it was with the
first 40 days, she was not praying for a miracle. We see clearly from
the gemora that it is prohibited to depend on a miracle to provide
livelihood without us doing any action or having an occupation. Even
though it is necessary to know that all the profit which comes from
working or business is only from G-d according to what was fixed on Rosh
HaShannaג€"but this is only when we have some occupation or business
dealings. This necessity for effort is stated in the Torah "by the
sweat of your brow you will eat bread" and is discussed at the end
of Kiddushin. Even according R' Nehorai who only taught his son Torah
and not a tradeג€"indicating that there is no need to teach a trade to
one's sonג€"agrees that one can not rely on a miracle. His view is that
the majority of people can not learn Torah and a trade at the same time
while young. Thus his position is that when a person is an adult, G-d will
provide him some way of earning a living and supporting his familyג€"even
if he didn't learn a trade while a child. However as an adult even R'
Nehorai would agree that it is prohibited to do nothing and rely on a
miracle. This understanding is seen in the Rambam who poskens like R'
Nehorai that there is no need to teach a trade and poskens in Hilchos
Talmud Torah (3:10) that it is necessary to have an occupation.... Thus
this prohibition applies even for gedolim and tzadikim who are on the
spiritual level where it is possible that a miracle will be done for
them and surely it prohibited to those in our generationג€"orphans of
orphansג€"to rely on miracles. Furthermore there is no sin in trying to
find an occupation which is easier and more pleasant and which is more
profitable according to human evaluation. Even though of course we must
believe that G-d can give livelihood through any occupation as R' Meir
states in Kiddushin (82)ג€"but perhaps a person does not merit to get
livelihood except through one that is more likely to be profitable. But
one must know that all his profitג€"after all his effortsג€"is only from
G-d who gives the ability to succeed. As Targum Onkelos states that He
gives advice to the business man as to what approach will

kesiva vechasima tova,
Daniel Eidensohn
**

On Thu, Sep 29, 2005 at 02:03:53PM +0300, R Eli Turkel queried:
: ... On Yom kippur after the avodah there is (ashkenaz) again the famous
: piyut of mareh cohen with a similar theme.

Bizman sheBeis haMiqdash hayah (veyihyeh bb"a) qayam...

Yom Kippur shared with Tu be'Av the property of being one of the happiest
two days of the year. When the tola'as shani turned white, people knew
bevada'us that mechilah was granted. None of the uncertainty and worry
of today.

The loss of the avodah fundamentally changed the experience of Yom Kippur.
How could we not acknowledge it on this day?

: However, in the tisha ba-av selichot there is almost no mention of the
: loss of korbanot and kapparah because of the destruction of the Temple
: why?

OTOH, the actual loss of the bayis was caused by a loss of bein adam
lachaveiro. Therefore the qinos focus on the loss of the bayis as a
center for the Jewish people.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger             The purely righteous do not complain about evil,
micha@aishdas.org        but add justice, don't complain about heresy,
http://www.aishdas.org   but add faith, don't complain about ignorance,
Fax: (270) 514-1507      but add wisdom.     - R AY Kook, Arpilei Tohar

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


[ 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         ]