Avodah Mailing List

Volume 23: Number 86

Tue, 24 Apr 2007

• 1. Re: kashering caeser stone (Micha Berger)
• 2. Re: When do the malachim come (Micha Berger)
• 3. Re: Peanuts and other Kitnios (Samuel Svarc)
• 4. alloys/mixtures/compunds (Eli Turkel)
• 5. Judaism abhors extremism, as tempting as it may be (Prof. Levine)
• 6. Re: Judaism abhors extremism, as tempting as it may be (Rich, Joel)
• 7. Re: Peanuts and other Kitnios (Daniel Eidensohn)
• 8. (no subject) (Meir Rabi)
• 9. Re: Judaism abhors extremism, as tempting as it may be (Daniel Israel)
• 10. Re: Torah Study vs. other contributions to society (Micha Berger)
• 11. Re: Love of Israel (Chana Luntz)

On Mon, April 23, 2007 4:58 pm, R Daniel Israel wrote:
:>An alloy like steel or 14K gold would be a single chemical.

: I'm pretty sure that this is not quite correct.  Alloys are in some
: ways more like mixtures than compounds....

You're right I oversimplified, but I believe they are closer to
compounds. The subject of whether alloys are compounds or mixtures is
debated on the "talk" pages of the relavent wikipedia entries. They're
not sure. Metals have metallic bonds, a bunch of nuclei bonded
together by a soup of electrons. They aren't molecules of atoms held
together by electrons shared within the molecule in covalent bonds.

But that question aside, the point remains that the elements in still
are related in a way very differently than quartz glued together with
resin. We're talking about beli'ah -- the porosity of the whole is
that of steel, not of the individual items.

Tir'u baTov!
-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

On Thu, April 19, 2007 12:05 am, R Yaakov Moser wrote:
: RHS brings the RMF-RYBS in Nefesh HaRav page 157 - RYBS held it was to
: greet Shabbat, and thus he and other Gedolim in Europe would walk to
: the door to greet the Shabbat bride coming through the door. RMF holds
: it is for the Shechina, which is always in the West, even if the door
: is in another directions. See there for sources.

In Tzefas, where Qabbalas Shabbos was just said, the back of the shul
is generally north. But in R' Shelomo al-Qabetz's day, the doors were
generally in the west, to let in the "light" of Har Meron and qever
Rashb"i. Historically speaking, they didn't just face west, they
actually opened the doors.

So, you should face either west or the door, but not necessarily the
back. My attempt to resolve the machloqes by checking what was done
originally didn't help me much.

The only thing I would add is that since the Mequballei Tzedas often
said Qabbalas Shabbos in the woods, which door would they face then?

The machloqes seems to me to be whether Dodi is the Shechinah, and
Kallah is the neshamah yeseirah, or the other way around. Liqras
Kallah, penei Shabbos haMalkah -- is that the personal transition,
stepping through a doorway (of sorts), or the arrival of the Shechinah
with the celestial event of the setting of the sun?

BTW, the opinion RYM attributes to RMF is also that of the MB
(262:10), citing the Peri Megadim.


Returning to the original question, on Tue, April 17, 2007 4:22 pm,
T613K@aol.com wrote:
: Until about 500 years ago, there was no such song as Sholom Aleichem,
: so I don't think there is really a "must" time for singing it. I've
: heard of people not wanting to keep hungry guests waiting on a very
: late Friday, and therefore singing Sholom Aleichem after the first
: course....

This appeals to me: I think it's appropriate to keep mal'achim waiting
for you to first perform hachnasas orechim for tzalmei E-lokim. After
all, Avraham avinu put HQBH Himself on hold for what he thought were
three people. And aside from who needs the hachnasah more, people, who
are nos'im, are more chashuv (although generally less qadosh) than
mal'achim.

Tir'u baTov!
-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

>From: "Micha Berger" <micha@aishdas.org>
>Subject: Re: [Avodah] Peanuts and other Kitnios
>
>On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 17:16:13 +0300 R Danny Schoemann <doniels@gmail.com>:
>: As to the "Machon Shilo" thread about "The Psak Halacha Permitting
>: Kitniyot", the kuntras brings the OhS in 453:4 regarding Kitnios:
>: "This issur - since our ancestors accepted it as a Geder - may not be
>: abolished by us MiDin Tora, and those that cast aspersion and treat it
>: lightly prove that they do not have Yiras Shomayim or Yiras Chet and
>: are not expert in the ways of the Torah." (!)
>
>But they aren't talking about abolishiong the issur. They are saying
>that the issur is still fully in force for Ashkenazim. They are
>objecting to an Ashkenazi moving to Israel and remaining an Ashkenazi
>rather than becoming part of Israel's kehillah and following its
>minhag hamaqom (which they assume does not include refraining from
>qitniyos).
>
>And frankly, I'm still unclear as to how they are wrong.

They're wrong because there is no "Israeli kehillah" to join. There are tens
of kehillah's, some of which do keep kitnios. Once there is no minhag
hamakom one shouldn't change his own. What does he gain? He is not making it
any less "agudos, agudos", and he's losing out on his own minhagim, some of
which might be superior to what he's switching to, and some of them are
halachicaly problematic to change.

The Brisker Rav when he came to EY was greeted by the Ziknie Yerushalayim by
Motza (if I'm not mistaken). They had brought along a change of clothing in
the Yerushalmi style. The Griz declined to put them on, whereupon he was
asked, "R' Shmuel Salant, R' Yehoshua Leib Diskin, R' Yosef Chaim
Sonnenfeld, etc. all were m'kabel the levush. Why are you different?" He
answered, that those Gedolim came when there was only one Ashkenaz Kehilla
in Yerushlayim, and they were joining that kehillah. He on the other hand
was coming to a Yerushlayim that has many Ashkenazim that are not part of
the Yishuv Hayashan...

KT,
MSS

Alloys, such as steel or 14K gold, are made up of grains, and each
grain is a crystal containing only one element.  The size of the
grains may vary depending on how the alloy was produced.

Things like ceasarstone are made from separate pieces of stone held
together by a resin.

Of course the pieces in ceasarstone are much, much bigger than the
grains in an alloy.  Also, the grains are held together by chemical
bonds, not by some type of glue (resin).>>

Of course the question is do these differences affect the absorbility
of the material and did chazal look into the details of mixtures as
is done today.

-- 
Eli Turkel

At 01:35 AM 04/24/2007, Micha wrote:
>A topic for Avodah, but I believe the Rambam's shevil hazahav is one
>of utilizing both ends of the spectrum more than finding a point
>between them.

 From http://mishmar.blogspot.com/2006/08/centrism-and-extremism.html

As the Chazon Ish (Iggeros Chazon Ish 3:61), in a letter which is all 
but the antithesis of Centrism, put it:

"Just as simplicity and truth are synonymous, so are extremism and 
greatness synonymous...We are accustomed to hearing in well-known 
circles, as announcing about themselves that they have no share among 
the extremists, and they nevertheless reserve for the themselves the 
right of (being) a loyal Jew with sufficient Emunah in Torah and the 
words of Torah. And we allow ourselves to state from the 
vantage-point of justice, that just as among those who love wisdom 
there is no love for a bit of it and hatred of abundance of it, so 
too there is not among those who love Torah and Mitzvos a love of the 
middling and a hatred of extremism.

All the fundamentals of faith, the 13 principles, and their 
derivatives, are always in vigorous contradiction to easily grasped 
concepts and the ebb and flow of life developed under the sun. And 
their clear and justified cognition, which grants an excess of 
particularism in believing in them, is the pleasantness of extremism.

And those who testify about themselves that they have not tasted the 
sweetness of extremism, are simultaneously testifying that they are 
lacking in faith in the principles of the religion in terms of their 
analytical prowess and emotional bonds, and only with the ropes of 
some level of relationship are they tethered to them. And the 
extremists, at the depths of their soul, with all of their most 
intense wish to pity those lacking in extremism, will not accord 
respect and honor to those who oppose them. And the abyss which 
divides them, when it meets with practical actions which create, by 
the force of their nature, arguments and bickering, will add to the 
rift incurably.

The Beinonius which has the right of existence, is the attribute of 
the Beinonim who love extremism and strive for it with all of the 
will of their soul, and they educate their descendants to the apex of 
extremism. But how pathetic is the Beinonius which has contempt for 
extremism. The obligation of our Chinuch is to extremism! The armory 
of Chinuch is, to plant contempt and disgust for those who mock extremism."


Yitzchok Levine 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070424/4f40976a/attachment.html 

<http://mishmar.blogspot.com/2006/08/centrism-and-extremism.html> As the
Chazon Ish (Iggeros Chazon Ish 3:61), in a letter which is all but the
antithesis of Centrism, put it:



The Beinonius which has the right of existence, is the attribute of the
Beinonim who love extremism and strive for it with all of the will of
their soul, and they educate their descendants to the apex of extremism.
But how pathetic is the Beinonius which has contempt for extremism. The
obligation of our Chinuch is to extremism! The armory of Chinuch is, to
plant contempt and disgust for those who mock extremism."



	Yitzchok Levine   

	\---------------------------------------------- 

	Might it just be that HKB"H created us all differently and some
resonate to the extremist position while others don't and that it's a
case of eilu veilu and we need to be self aware of our own psyches and
empathetic to see how others view the world?
	
	KT
	Joel Rich 

THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE 
ADDRESSEE.  IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL 
INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE.  Dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 
strictly prohibited.  If you received this message in error, please notify us 
immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message.  
Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070424/fba0809e/attachment.htm 

R' Samuel Svarc wrote:
>> But they aren't talking about abolishiong the issur. They are saying
>> that the issur is still fully in force for Ashkenazim. They are
>> objecting to an Ashkenazi moving to Israel and remaining an Ashkenazi
>> rather than becoming part of Israel's kehillah and following its
>> minhag hamaqom (which they assume does not include refraining from
>> qitniyos).
>>
>> And frankly, I'm still unclear as to how they are wrong.
>>     
>
> They're wrong because there is no "Israeli kehillah" to join. There are tens
> of kehillah's, some of which do keep kitnios. Once there is no minhag
> hamakom one shouldn't change his own. What does he gain? He is not making it
> any less "agudos, agudos", and he's losing out on his own minhagim, some of
> which might be superior to what he's switching to, and some of them are
> halachicaly problematic to change.

Igros Moshe (YD IV 15.3 page 184): Question: Is it necessary to act in 
accord with the minhag of Israel which is printed in seforim? Answer: 
Concerning the minagim of Israel - Rav Tuchichinsky has already 
published seform on all the issues. However I have been uncertain 
concerning a number of issues that are mentioned in his sefer and other 
seforim on the subject. Do they in fact have the status of minhag. In 
particular since those immigrants who came to Israel after they were 
decreed  constitute ten times as many people as the original population 
and they have different minhagim - whether their minhagim become 
nullified before the local minhag?

Daniel Eidensohn

Rashi explains [vayikra 9:23] that Mosher R and Aharon H entered the Ohel M
to pray. This was prompted by Aharon H complaining to Mosher R, in words
that seem to almost accuse him of having set him up for failure, "Moshe my
brother, this you did to me that I entered and I was humiliated?"

1.	Did Aharon think even for one moment that Moshe suggested this as
his own idea?
2.	Did HKBH want Aharon to suffer this humiliation?
3.	How would Moshe's remedy, entering the Ohel M with Aharon and
praying, help remove the humiliation of Aharon's failure to successfully
initiate the Mikdash? On the contrary, the people would observe that success
came only after Moshe's intervention.
4.	Rashi [later] mentions that BNY were very anxious to be reassured
that they had been forgiven for their indiscretion with the Egel H. They
were expressing their concerns to Moshe R when he was performing for the
first 7 days thinking that since the Shechinah had not yet resided on their
handiwork they had not been forgiven; to which Mosher replied just wait
until Aharon H does this; he is more appropriate and significant than I and
through his sacrifices and service the Shechinah will reside amongst you and
you will be assured that HaShem ... now we would have concluded that
sentence with "has forgiven you" but Rashi [chazal] concludes "you will be
assured that HaShem ... chose him." [meaning Aharon HaCohen]

1.	it is almost as though the Yidden had rejected Aharon H [perhaps
they thought he could not possibly be the one through whom they would attain
forgiveness when he was himself implicated in the Egel Hazahav] and Moshe R
said You will have evidence of his being chosen by HKB"H when he does the
Avodah and it is accepted.
2.	but as we know it was not accepted until Moshe joined him in
Tefillah.

 

Any thoughts?

 

meir

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070424/acaae6be/attachment.html 

On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 10:21:06 +0000 "Prof. Levine" 
<llevine@stevens.edu> wrote:
>As the Chazon Ish (Iggeros Chazon Ish 3:61), in a letter which is 
>all but the antithesis of Centrism, put it: ...

Not having access to the sefer, it would clarify a lot if someone 
could post what the original Hebrew is that is being translated as 
"extremism."  Also what is the hebrew for "Just as simplicity and 
truth are synonymous"?

--
Daniel M. Israel
dmi1@cornell.edu

On Thu, April 19, 2007 5:38 pm, R Doron Beckerman wrote:
: Let us take a hypothetical of an 18 year old of average-ish
: intelligence who seriously learns Torah B'Taharah, decent Hasmadah,
: with no Parnassah concerns, and with no aspirations of becoming a
Rabbi.

: This person could be a great medic if he would train, but he does not
: want to give up the time needed for that course because he wants to
: continue learning for  the foreseeable future.
...
: By age 40 or so, he'll be a Baki in a good few Massechtos, and he'll
: have a
: good knowledge of Halachah, but he has no Rabbinical skills. There are
: people aged 25 in Yeshivos who know far more than he does.

: Has this person fulfilled his mission in life from a TuM perspective?

I think the only problem from a TuM perspective is that he had no
justification for defying the Rambam's ban on living off one's
learning.

I'm reminded of the story (urban legend) of R' Chaim Brisker bemoaning
the fact that Einstein didn't go into learning. However, one wonders
how differently WWII would have ended had relativity been discovered a
couple of decades later, and the US didn't get the bomb.

In theory it's easy to say the world would have been better off with
more learning. In practice, it's hard to see how this would be true in
Einstein's case. (Or Szilard, Teller, Simon or Curti, noted Jewish
members of the Manhattan Project.)

The question as phrased is for the A-lmighty's accountant. Our
question is what to choose to do; not the value of a choice once made.
If the person's neti'os are to learn, then he has the most important
quality for learning -- cheisheq. (Not, as implied, intelligence or
memory.)

Tir'u baTov!
-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

I wrote previously on this topic:

> Note however that this is Yehoshua, ie Navi, being darshened 
> in this way, not Torah (and all the discussions identify 
> kovod hamelech etc as a Torah obligation),

On doing some further research it appears that the Chatam Sofer has this
problem (see teshuva 208 of Orech Chaim).  He states that while there is
an obligation to give kavod to a king, based on a drasha of the Torah,
we don't see anywhere in the Torah that a king has the power to put a
person to death.  And while it is clear that what Yehoshua says must be
a din emes - he has a kasha as to how Yehoshua as a navi is able to be
mechadesh something not found in the Torah.  And his resolution appears
to be based on a Ramban in Vaikra 27:29 (the relevant pasuk is kol
cherem asher yicharam min haadam lo yfadeh mos umas) where the Ramban
says that we deduce from this that a king b'yisroel or sanhedrin gedola
in the presence of all Israel who has the authority to institute
judgments, if they declare something cherem, one who violates this is
guilty of death.  And so, according to the Chatam Sofer, it is via this
mechanism that the statement in Yehoshua that anybody who transgresses
his command shall be put to death draws its validity - ie because all of
Yisroel said to Yehoshua that whoever transgresses your command shall be
put to death, this created a cherem from the Torah, which makes the
transgressor liable from the Torah to be put to death, thus creating the
crime of being mored b'malkus, even if the melech is not a melech from
shevet Yehuda (something the Chatam Sofer states explicitly  - but that
in fact prior to this acceptance by Yisroel of the cherem, somebody who
transgressed a king's command would not have been chayav misa.

Regards

Chana



------------------------------


Avodah mailing list
Avodah@lists.aishdas.org
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 23, Issue 86
**************************************

Send Avodah mailing list submissions to
	avodah@lists.aishdas.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
	avodah-owner@lists.aishdas.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Avodah digest..."