Avodah Mailing List

Volume 23: Number 95

Wed, 02 May 2007

• 1. Re: Puzzling Targum Yonasans (Doron Beckerman)
• 2. Re: Judaism abhors extremism, as tempting as it may be (Micha Berger)
• 3. Re: Pesach Sheni (Alan Yaniger)
• 4. kabalat shabbos (Newman,Saul Z)
• 5. Re: fashion models and opera singers (T613K@aol.com)
• 6. Re: fashion models and opera singers (Zev Sero)
• 7. Re: fashion models and opera singers (Daniel Israel)
• 8. Re: When do the malachim come? (Daniel Israel)
• 9. Re: tachanun - avel, chattan & brit (Daniel Israel)
• 10. Down's syndrome (Eli Turkel)
• 11. medicines online? Easily! (Emanuel Weeks)

Regarding the "Mezuman Md'Eshtakad". Perhaps (not sure if this is Pshat,
Drush, or ridiculous) this is based on the Medrash the Chizkuni brings down,
that they chose someone upon whom it was decreed that he would not live out
that year to do the Shiluach LaAzazel. (He implies that this was based on
reading into this person's Mazal.) Since this was on Yom Kippur, when the
decree for the coming year vis-a-vis life and death was made based on the
actions of the prior year, perhaps we can say that the Meshaleach was
determined 'from the previous year' (before Rosh HaShanah), i.e. based on
his actions during that time.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070502/0a23ccfc/attachment-0001.htm 

On Tue, April 24, 2007 6:54 pm, kennethgmiller@juno.com wrote:
: I am befuddled by Prof. Levine's posting from the Chazon
: Ish. "Extremism" is neither a virtue nor a vice, much like a gun or a
: knife, or, for that matter, a pen or an antibiotic. It all depends on
: what you use it for.

Extremism can be qana'us or qitzoniyus. There is a difference between
the one who veers from the shevil hazahav and the one who staunchly
and passionately defends a position. The former, the one at the
qatzeh, is wrong (at least lefi haRambam), the latter, the qana'i, is
as wrong or as laudable as the position in question. There is the
qana'us of Shim'on veLevi, or that of Pinechas.

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 agree that eating matzah the night of Iyar 15 makes more sense.
nevertheless Tachanun is not said on Iyar 14 but is said on Iyar 15>>

If you accept Rav Breuer's understanding of Pesach, there is no
tension here. The 14th of Nisan is Chag HaPesach, built around the
Korban Peasch. Since regarding Korbanot, the night follows the day,
this Chag continues into the night of the 15th, but not to the next
morning. The second Chag, Chag HaMatzot, begins on the 15th of Nisan
at night, and continues for 7 days. Since Pesach Sheni is a second
chance for the korban Pesach, it can be seen as beginning on the
morning of Iyyar 14th, and continuing through the night of Iyyar 15th.
It's a replay of Chag HaPesach, not Chag HaMatzot. So there's no
problem if the minhag would be to eat matzah at night, and not say
Tachanun in the morning. By morning, the chag is over.

Alan

for a community where it would be very hard to get a minyan friday nite [
and someone needs to say kaddish so they want to make a minyan],  is anyone
aware of a shitta that would allow davening including maariv- with a kavana
not to be mekabel  shabbos until after driving home and there being mkabel
shabbos at licht bentching time?   i suppose the other option is trying to
get  6 to daven and the rest could drive home...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070502/7321ac8f/attachment.html 

 
 
In a message dated 5/2/2007, chana@kolsassoon.org.uk writes:

>>Note that this issue comes up in a whole myriad of contexts -  your
husband may well face it, at least indirectly, if he sells CDs and  such
to not such religious Jews - how does he know they won't play them  on
shabbas?<< [--RCL]

>>>>>
Your whole post was your usual terrific and insightful analysis  -- except 
just this one point is maybe a little weak.   A CD can  certainly be played on 
weekdays, thus my husband has no obligation to make sure  that his customers do 
in fact play CDs only on weekdays.  The lifnei iver  in the case of a woman 
opera singer is that a man in the audience necessarily  hears her voice -- it's 
not as if he can decide to only hear the male singers'  voices.  Or in the 
case of the bikini-clad woman on the beach -- it's not  as if it's possible for 
a man to look at her and only see her face and  hands -- the way it is 
possible for someone to play a CD only on weekdays.   If my husband sold CDs that 
only work on Shabbos your comparison would be  stronger.
 
The opera singer or bikini-wearer seems to me to be a little closer to  
someone selling treif meat to a Jew, while my husband's case is more like the  
grocer selling cheese blintzes and chopped liver to a customer.  How does  he know 
that the customer won't eat them together?  Yet no posek  requires separate 
stores for milk and meat.
 
Yes I did follow your reasoning as to why the opera singer might not be in  
technical violation of any halacha -- you compared it to being a lawyer who  
takes Jewish clients, which the poskim you cite permit.  I still  think the 
opera would be an exceptionally poor career choice for a  frum woman -- MUCH worse 
than being a lawyer!
 
 :- )
 
[Please note smiley face appended to obviate the possibility of any  umbrage 
being taken by esteemed Avodah members of the legal  profession.]

 

--Toby  Katz
=============



************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070502/165d91af/attachment.htm 

Chana Luntz wrote:

> The comparision to the opera singer case would seem pretty
> straightforward.  If this particular opera singer did not sing, somebody
> else would, making it a same side of the river case.

As I said, I don't think it's even a "one side of the river" case.
In the "one side of the river" case you are still helping the nazir
to do an avera.  He could have got the wine himself, but in fact he
didn't, you handed it to him, thus making it easier for him.  If you
hadn't done that, perhaps he'd have decided that it wasn't worth the
effort, or perhaps on the way to get it he'd have had a hirhur teshuva
and not done it.

But in our case the man has bought his ticket, dressed up, is sitting
in his seat, and is going to hear a woman sing, no matter what you do.
Your singing isn't even going to cause him to hear more kol isha than
he would otherwise do, because if you turn down the gig then the woman
who replaces you will sing exactly the same songs, for exactly the
same amount of time.  And by you taking the gig that other woman will
*not* sing.

That's why I gave the analogy of standing with a tray of wine available
to all comers, right next to a goy who is holding an identical tray,
and a nazir who declares his intention to drink exactly one cup, no
more and no less.  You're not handing him the cup, or making it in any
way easier for him to do the avera.  Nor are you increasing the
quantity of wine he will drink.  His choice of your wine rather than
the goy's may be completely random, or perhaps it's because your wine
is better than the goy's; it still doesn't matter, because drinking
good wine is no more of an avera than drinking bad, so long as the
quantity of wine drunk remains the same.


 
> "Thus three approaches can be found with regard to aiding one who wishes
> to sin.  Maimonides maintains that the biblical prohibition is always
> violated by aiding.  Rabbanu Nissim (Ran) belives that biblical law is
> violated only when others cannot also execute the act; Tosafot maintains
> that when there are others who can - and will aid the violater or he
> could act alone, neither rabbinic nor biblical law is violated."

I'd say that in our case even the Rambam would permit it, because you're
not actually aiding him.



> Of course defining a woman to be a kadesha based on these types of
> actions would make it much more difficult for kohanim to ever marry, so
> I think that mostly poskim have shied away from such a position.

Why?  A kohen can't marry a zonah, but I'm not aware of any issur on
his marrying a kedesha.  In fact AFAIK a kohen is allowed, lechatchila,
to marry an actual prostitute, so long as she hasn't been with anyone
whom she could not marry, or with a chalal.

-- 
Zev Sero               Something has gone seriously awry with this Court's
zev@sero.name          interpretation of the Constitution.
                       	                          - Clarence Thomas

On Wed, 02 May 2007 15:50:17 +0000 "Rabbi Y. H. Henkin" 
<henkin@012.net.il> wrote:
>The difference is that Lifnei Iver is violated in that the viewer 
>of a woman in a bikini likely would have sexual thoughts?hirhurim. 
>The listener to a female singer in an opera likely would not, 
>nowadays. Hence, no Lifnei Iver.

Due to the manner in which opera is sung, and the degree of 
exposure someone who actually is attending an opera probably has 
already had, this would be my impression as well (that there would 
be no hirhurim).  However, I would wonder if this would be the case 
in another venue, for example a jazz recital or Broadway style 
musical theater.  And I would think even opera might create 
hirhurim in a man who is from a community in which he virtually 
never hears women singing (which would relate to his listening, not 
to the original question of the permissibility of the singing, 
since presumably such a person wouldn't go to the opera).

--
Daniel M. Israel
dmi1@cornell.edu

On Wed, 02 May 2007 15:49:03 +0000 Dov Kay <dov_kay@hotmail.co.uk> 
wrote:
>The next morning, I was informed that in Hungary (presumably 
Oberland), 
>they would say the whole of kabbolas from the shulchan, but in 
Germany 
>they would only say Lecha Dodi from the shulchan;  l?chu neranena 
was 
>said from the amud.

I cannot answer your question, but I can tell you that the only 
time I davened kabbalas Shabbos in a Yekke shul (somewhere in 
Talpiot, I think, but I don't remember the name) I was told to dave 
all of kabbalas Shabbos from the bima.  So I don't think the 
practice you describe is universal among Yekkes.

--
Daniel M. Israel
dmi1@cornell.edu

On Wed, 02 May 2007 10:52:38 +0000 Eli Turkel <eliturkel@gmail.com> 
wrote:
>The question is
>1. why does shiva not affect Tachanun of the tzibbur (not in his 
>house)
>2. A chatan stops Tachanun but only in his minyan
>3. A Brit stops tachanun in all minyanim in the same shul

After reading the other postings on this thread, it seems to me as 
follows.  The hava amina is chasan case, so we need to explain the 
other two.  The din regarding bris, IIRC, applies when the bris is 
actually happening in the shul, so that makes sense: the din is on 
the location of the bris, not on the ba'al bris.  (In which case 
for a ba'al bris when the bris will not be in the shul, it should 
be like a chasan, which I vaguely remember to be the case, but I 
don't have a SA at the office.)  As far as the avel, I think it 
makes sense (as someone else suggests) that the din is on the 
bayis.  Aside from the point mentioned, that the neshmah of the 
niftar is associated with the bayis (I think this is specifically 
if the beis avel is the niftar's house, but that is the l'chatchila 
choice), an avel is not generally supposed to go out.  In fact, 
davening at the shul at all is b'deivad.  Of course, if the avel 
does go out, he still has din of an avel.  But still the shiva is 
strongly associated with the bayis.  I might even suggest that this 
is precisely why tachnun is said in the shul: to make clear that 
the avel really ought to make a minyan in the bayis, and coming to 
shul doesn't just turn that into an equivalent location.

B'derech drush: Ivdu es HaShem b'simcha.  Perhaps we see that when 
we can inject simcha into our avodah we do, whereas if we can avoid 
spreading tzurus, we avoid it.  Although it is important to note 
that this is regarding spreading from the gavra outward.  When it 
comes to the other direction we are chayiv in both nichum aveilim 
and hachnasas kallah.

--
Daniel M. Israel
dmi1@cornell.edu

Just returned from the monthly shiur of R. Zilberstein. Part of the shiur
was  halachot connected with Down's syndrome. He paskened that if
they understand things on the level of a 6-7 year they are chayav in
mitzvot and can be motzeh pthers. He brought a case of a widow who
wanted her Down's syndrome son to say kiddush and havdalah for her.
R. Zilberstein asked the boy when one eats blintzes, eats matzah, takes
a lulav etc and the boy knew. He was especially impressed when he asked
when one blows shofar and the boy answered " from Rosh Chodesh Elul
of course". On that basis he paskened the boy could be motzih his
mother on all mitzvot.
The main questions involved marriage and he paskened that such a boy could
marry a similar woman and have children.

In the end he brought a story of  a Down Syndrome's boy who learns in
Ponovezh (he is the grandson of the masgiach). If anyone has a question
of where a pasuk appears in Tanakh they come to him with the question!
The main thrust of the shiur was the insistence that every Jew has the
same tzelem Elokim independent of their intellectual capacity (the shiur
started with a discussion of the medical treatment of Alzheimer's patients)

kol tuv

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070502/9c0615bd/attachment.html 

W" align=baseline border=0> always wise; nay, our common learning, so much cried up, First, I would point out to you the fountain, from which all into the kingdom of God, and those that are entering in he to us sanctification and redemption: but, 'he is made': for man before-mentioned, ?they go away sorrowful?? for they can this thing be?? And no wonder then, that so many are strength of sin is the law; but God has given them the victory comforts of religion. Whereas on the contrary, would they might become a curse for us: for it is written, ?Cursed is agree, according to one of our Articles, 'That the corruption is it but this half piety, this wavering between God and the it is plain, that Christ's resurrection was an earnest of ours: is not other than a consecrated dormitory, where your bodies Emanuel Weeks

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070502/079acb06/attachment.htm 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 8922 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070502/079acb06/attachment.gif 

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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 23, Issue 95
**************************************

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..."