Avodah Mailing List

Volume 23: Number 139

Mon, 18 Jun 2007

• 1. Re: wearing tzitzit outside (Micha Berger)
• 2. Re: birchot kriat shma for sefardi women (Yaakov Moser)
• 3. Re: Torah Study vs. other contributions to society (Dov Bloom)
• 4. Re: Har Habayit - (sent by his Roshei Yeshiva in 1939) (Dov Bloom)
• 5. Re: Tzitzis - MB (Micha Berger)
• 6. Re: Yeshivishe Peyos (Micha Berger)
• 7. Re: Yeshivishe Peyos (mkopinsky@gmail.com)
• 8. Kos Shel Bracha (kennethgmiller@juno.com)
• 9. Re: Yotzei Mitzraim (Micha Berger)
• 10. Netziv Story (Boruch Horowitz)
• 11. Re: Kos Shel Bracha (Moshe Y. Gluck)
• 12. Re: wearing tzitzit outside (Moshe Feldman)

On Wed, June 13, 2007 4:02 am, RDBannett wrote:
: IIRC, my source for the CC's remark to his son-in-law and
: grandson re: the misunderstanding of the MB statement re"
: tzitzit out is none other than our R' Seth....
: BTW, it is not uncommon for talmidim to write up their
: rebbe's Torah for publication and misunderstanding sometimes
: occurs.

Except that RSM didn't blame the talmidim.

Rather, in a different thread he points to the haqdamah to the MB,
which says that the seifer's intent is to provide a survey of opinions
that post-date the standardized SA page's nosei keilim. From this, RSM
concludes that the MB is a book of theory, what the pesaq would be
purely on the merits of the lomdus.

See <http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol09/v09n055.shtml#04>,
particularly the last paragraph

For R' Dr Haym Soloveitchik fans: I guess that would translate into
saying that the CC was not necessarily any less of a mimeticist than
the AhS. However, the AhS was lema'aseh, and the MB is a book of
textualist theory -- and lemaaseh would still require more mimetic
contributions.

Tir'u baTov!
-mi

PS: For those who came too late to "meet" him, RDB and I are
discussing the contribution of R' Seth Mandel, who used to contribute
quite regularly before the OU stole him from us. Now, he's too busy
making sure people sell me only kosher meat...

BCC: RSM, so that he can correct any misrepresentation on my part. In
the first paragraph; the textualist/mimeticist thing is my own
extension of what I understood RSM to prove.

-- 
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 Fri, June 8, 2007 6:36 am, R Eli Turkel wrote:
> : Again I would be interested if most sefardi women really skip this
> : whole section of schararit (or maaariv for that matter) and what
> sefardi
> : schools for women do.
>
> A neighbor of mine had his son and daughter-in-law visiting, and they
> are real "chassidim" of ROY's. She owns a "women's siddur" that claims
> to be leshitato which contains birkhot Shema for Shacharit without
> shem umalkhut.
>
> Tir'u baTov!
> -mi
>   
I can confirm that Yalkut Yosef (in the volume "Dinim for women", p. 
30), reflecting his father's psak, rules that if a woman desires to do 
so, she can say Pesukei Dezimra with no shem umalkhut in Baruch She'amar 
or Yistabach, and Birkhot kriat shema with no shem umalchut in any of 
the brachot.

Jason Moser

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070615/6c529eaa/attachment-0001.html 

I met last night with Aaron Eliahu ( a brother of the former Chief Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu). The father of the Eliyahu family was R. Salman Eliyahu, a well-known kabbalist in the old city of Jerusalem in the early 1900's. R' Salman is the author of the popular commentary on the "Eitz Hayyim" of the ARIZ"L entitled "Kerem Shlomo", which is still available nowadays and apparently popular among those who learn nistar.

R. Salman Eliyahu was proficient in Hebrew, Arabic (having grown up in Turkish governed Jerusalem) and also English, having been sent by his father to study in London. He thus was able to serve as the personal secretary of the first British High Commisioner of the British Mandate, Lord Herbert Samuel. 

I asked his Aaron Eliyahu his son (who is now well into his 80's) wasn't it unusual for a talmid hakkam and "mekubal" to hold down such a "secular" job. He answered me "In Jerusalem in those days no-one thought anything of it, no one even raised such a question. Look at the Rambam and the Abarbanel..."

Last night I met with Aaron Eliyahu ( a brother of the former Chief Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu). The father of the Eliyahu family was R. Salman Eliyahu, a well-known kabbalist in the old city of Jerusalem in the early 1900's, and the author of a popular commentary on the "Eitz Hayyim" of the ARIZ"L (see previous post).

Mr A. Eliyahu, who is in his 80's but pretty alert, related the following story (be-dido havey uvda) which relates to the thread on ascending to Har HaBayit. Actually, it is apparent that the story was a case of Pikuach Nefesh D'Rabim so I don't know if it sheds any light on our thread. 

Mr. Eliyahu learned at the Porat Yosef Yeshiva in the 1930's. The Yeshiva is and was located close to the kotel and Har Habayit. 1936-1939 were years of frequent Arab riots in Eretz Yisrael. 415 Jews were killed during this period. Mr. Eliyahu, who grew up in the old city , related that every Friday after Moslem prayers in the El-Aksa mosque on Har Habayit the Moslem worshippers  would swarm out of Har Habayit in some direction, and look for 'infidels' to hurt or kill C"V. "Sometimes they went to one part of the Jewish quarter in one direction, sometimes to another part of the Jewish Quarter in another direction, sometimes to the Christian quarter, every Friday to a different area" he related. A number of times they came to the Porat Yoseph Yeshiva which was protected by a fence and a gate that could be locked. The Jews had a relatively small number of guards who could not protect all of the possible sites. If  the Jews would know where they were heading they could mass all of their guards.

Mr. Eliyahu, who was fluent in Arabic, having grown up in the old city,  was sent in 1939 "by the Roshei Yeshiva" to infiltrate the Moslem prayers on Fridays, so that he could overhear the Moslem worshippers discussing and deciding where to go that day to riot. He would then quickly leave and inform the Jewish community which sites to protect. He said "they never knew why whatever site they went to it was guarded". He did this numerous Fridays until the riots petered out.

He was told to dress like an Arab, speak like an Arab and go with the crowd that entered Har HaBayit from the northern side. He took his shoes off like the Arabs. He was taught the Moslem prayers so that he could 'fake it' and was told to "pray aloud just like the Arabs so he wouldn't be suspected". When he asked his Roshei Yeshiva if saying the Moslem prayers wasn't an aveirah, he was told that "he would be forgiven".

I asked him who sent him - was it the Haganah or something, and he said, no the Porat Yosef Yeshiva sent me. I asked (in light of our thread about where on Har Habait one could walk) if he was instructed to avoid certain areas and walk only in others, he answered that he was told to go with all of the Arabs and not to be different, not to raise suspicion. He repeated that he took his shoes off with them. I asked him if he was instructed to go to the mikveh first and he repeated that he was told not to do anything different than all the Arabs (he  didn't give  direct yes or no and I had no opportunity to question him further.

Dov Bloom

On Tue, June 12, 2007 6:56 am, Michael Kopinsky wrote:
: The MB writes (and I paraphrase... ) " ... they would
: just tuck the tzitzis into the kanaf (rather than into their pants)."

: What is the kanaf that he is referring to?  Did their tzitzis have a
: pocket on the corner (like NeaTzit (R)) to tuck the strings in?

I never had a problem with this, but not because I thought about it.

When I was little, my mother would pop the stitching on one side of
the reinforcement for the corner of the tzitzis, and tuck my string in
there. (Particularly when I was wearing shorts that were shorter than
my tzitzis, so that they would hang out the bottom otherwise.)

I had assumed the MB meant something similar. But again, that was an
uninformed assumption.

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 Sun, June 10, 2007 2:28 am, mkopinsky@gmail.com wrote:
: Having a pretty case for an esrog or megilla shows chibuv mitzvah.  Is
: there an element of chibuv for lavim? ...
: Where does the halachic literature talk about noi mitzvah?  Is there
: any precedent of noi mitzvah for lavim? ...

As a non halachic source, see peirushim on "zeh keili ve'anveihu".

If you accept chibuv mitzvah as a halachic concept and noi (like the
fancy case), is a demonstration of chibuv, I don't know why you would
suggest the idea is only aggadic.

But no, I don't know of one. Never thought to look -- people throw
around the term to the point that I never questioned it.

But I just noticed this diyuq in a post sent on Sun, June 10, 2007
1:58am, by R Danny Schoemann:
: The phrase "lo siga bo yad" seems to have been coined by the Beis
: Yosef - and there he clearly means as you say it does - not to narrow
: the width of the Payes.

He didn't coin the phrase, the BY *borrowed* it. From ma'amad har Sinai.

Is it intentional that the BY is implicitly comparing peiyos to har
Sinai during the revelation? If so... that's serious chibuv mitzvah
for our lav.

On Mon, June 11, 2007 8:45 am, RAM <kennethgmiller@juno.com> wrote:
: Perhaps the following will illustrate the idea of chibuv for lavin:
: Rashi, Vayikra 20:26: Rabbi Elazar ben Azaryah says, "... One should
: not say 'I am disgusted by pork' or 'I don't like wearing shaatnez'.
: Rather, he should say, 'I *DO* want it, but what can I do? My Father
: in Heaven decreed for me not to.'"

This is a famous topic in the Rambam, discussed in contrast to RYS's
vision of bringing one's desires in line with the Borei's. In that
context, it's not so much associated with lavin as with mitzvos
shim'iyos. Thus, one would similarly say for an asei that's a choq, "I
have no desire to ... but Hashem decreed I should."

However, if the mitzvah is sichlis, then the Rambam may or may not
promote a similar attitude, whereas RYS would say the idea is to
desire whatever it is the mitzvah is aiming for.

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 6/15/07, Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org> wrote:
> But I just noticed this diyuq in a post sent on Sun, June 10, 2007
> 1:58am, by R Danny Schoemann:
> : The phrase "lo siga bo yad" seems to have been coined by the Beis
> : Yosef - and there he clearly means as you say it does - not to narrow
> : the width of the Payes.
>
> He didn't coin the phrase, the BY *borrowed* it. From ma'amad har Sinai.
>
> Is it intentional that the BY is implicitly comparing peiyos to har
> Sinai during the revelation? If so... that's serious chibuv mitzvah
> for our lav.

I have heard the idea expressed (I don't remember where) that the reason
for preventative chumras (s'yagim lis'yagim) is that while any mitzvah
allows us to demonstrate ahavas Hashem either by the maaseh itself or by
hiddurim in its performance, the only way to actively demonstrate (or
develop, maybe?) yir'as Hashem (or at least, yiras Cheit) is by actively
distancing oneself from a safeik aveira.

The hagbalos of har Sinai (perhaps like the hagbalos of Har Habayis, to
combine yet another thread) are a demonstration/fulfillment of mora.
Just like we have to keep a physical, and thus emotional, distance from
har Sinai, we have to keep a physical, and thus emotional, distance from
doing that which G-d wants us not to do.  Thus, the relevant chumra by
peiyos would be "lo siga bo yad" - not to touch the peiyos and risk
cutting them where we shouldn't - rather than hiddur a.k.a. chibuv a.k.a.
zeh keili v'anveihu.

KT,
Michael

I'm interesting in knowing how the concept of Kos Shel Bracha 
originated.

As far as I can imagine, there is no mitzva which -- on a D'Oraisa 
level -- requires us to say certain words over a cup of wine. Wine is 
used in certain korbanos, but so is water, grain, fruit, fowl, and 
many other items. The idea of linking a speech to a kos seems new to 
me.

Here's another way of phrasing my question: After Har Sinai, it was 
understood by all that "Zachor es yom hashabbos l'kadsho" requires us 
to not only remember Shabbos mentally, but to actually verbalize it 
with words. For some period of time, each person was careful to say 
such a thing each Shabbos. At some later point, Chazal saw fit to 
standardize this mitzvah with a specific ritual. Among other 
requirements, they said that we must not choose any random praise, 
but that it must be in the form of a bracha, and that this bracha 
must include certain concepts (such as Yetzias Mitzrayim), and that 
it must be said with a cup of wine, and other requirements.

From where did this idea originate? They could have chosen many other 
ways of standardizing this mitzvah. They could have simply said, for 
example, that instead of choosing our own words, we should recite the 
fourth of the Aseres HaDibros. But they went far beyond simply 
presrbing the words, and I cannot help but suspect that it originated 
with a pre-existing ritual: that of making a toast.

Someone was sitting with his family at their Shabbos seudah, 
remembered to do this mitzvah d'Oraisa of praising Shabbos with 
words, and raised his cup (perhaps of wine, perhaps of schnapps, 
perhaps of beer, probably not of water), and declared "Baruch Hashem 
for giving us the holy Shabbos!", or something like that. The idea 
caught on, and eventually became ritualized, formalized, and 
legislated into the Mitzvah D'Rabanan of Kiddush Al HaKos which we 
know today.

And along the way, similar toasts became formalized into other Kosos 
Shel Bracha: at a chupah, at a bris, even birkas hamazon would be 
given extra kavod by saying it with a kos.

What do others think? Am I totally off base, or what?

Akiva Miller

On Sun, Jun 10, 2007 at 10:06:52AM -0400, RAG <Galsaba@aol.com> wrote:
: Reading Baba Batra 117A, and also the explaination of the Rashbam , it is not
: clear to me what the difference is between the two Tanaim, Rabbi Yoshya and
: Rabbi Yonatan. It looks like no matter if dividing the land was based on the
: parents who left egypt, or based on the childern that entered the country of
: Israel, either way dividing of the land will be equal between the fathers who
: left egypt, so if one father (Reuven) has 10 children and the other one (Shimon)
: has one child, the land of Shimon's child will be about 10 times bigger than
: the land of each of Reuven's children. If this is the case, then what ois the
: difference between the opinions of the two Tanaim?

The Rashbam ("leba'ei ha'aretz nechliqah ha'aretz") writes that according
to R' Yonasan, Re'uvein's children would end up with a total of 10 times
the land of Shim'on's child. "Aval achshav ha'asarah notelin 10 chalaqim,
veha'echad noteil cheileq echad."

On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 01:23:42PM -0400, he continued:
: The Peirush that I liked is the one of the Tosafot. To my understanding here 
: is the difference: 
: If the Chaluka is to Yotzei Mitzraim (those who left Egypt themselves) , then 
: only the "Not Tefelim" get a piece of land. "Not Tefelim" are those that are 
: not women, or more than 20 years old. 

As I understand them, Tosafos do not so much deal with how the land
is divided to fit population, but the inheritence issue. This ties to
the gemara's focus - benos Tzelafchad. Benos Tzelafchad were tefeilim,
so that they wouldn't show in the census, but do end up inheritors --
if Tzelafchad actually got land.

This raises the issue of how R' Yoshiya connects the land to yotz'ei
Mitzrayim. Does the land retroactively belong to the yotz'ei Mitzrayim?
If not, how did benos Tzelafchad have anything to inherit?

If the land is given to the yotz'ei Mitzrayim, and the yotzei passed
away, his bechor would get double. If it was given to the ba'ei aretz,
then all get equally.

Tir'u baTov!
-mi

-- 
Micha Berger             Rescue me from the desire to win every
micha@aishdas.org        argument and to always be right.
http://www.aishdas.org              - Rav Nassan of Breslav
Fax: (270) 514-1507                   Likutei Tefilos 94:964

  Quoting RYGB:
   
  > I think this is a horrible, terrible story, and reason in itself for 
  the book to have been banned. :-)
   
  If one is  against  banning   My Uncle the Netziv, or against bans as a  general rule, then they should be consistent, and  be against banning even such stories   At  times(not always)it may be  appropriate to follow, what is attributed to Voltaire(I think in error):  I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it  :)
   
  <It is the most anti-TIDE story I know, but even more so, enough to 
  impose an eternal guilt trip on so many people who would actually do 
  well to seek a profession and be neheneh me'yegi'a kapeihem.
   
  A person, especially a child, needs to know how to *dahare* and put a story in context. As long as an educator explains the Netziv story properly and in context of pro-TIDE sources, it doesn't have to lead to a guilt trip. Sometimes however, I agree that a story is so terrible that it should not be told at all. 
   
  For example, someone wanted to bring out the point that people should have more sensitivity and not say: *that statement is retarded*. To illustrate the point, this person told a * scary story*, where someone made such a statement, and then had a retarded child. Such a  story and *lesson* is  false and dangerous for more than one reason,  and should not be told, even if it is  *frum-sounding*.
   
  (I used asterisks instead of quotations, as the latter appears as question marks).
   
   
   

       
---------------------------------
Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows.
Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070617/6d21ff7a/attachment-0001.htm 

R' Akiva Miller:
Someone was sitting with his family at their Shabbos seudah, 
remembered to do this mitzvah d'Oraisa of praising Shabbos with 
words, and raised his cup (perhaps of wine, perhaps of schnapps, 
perhaps of beer, probably not of water), and declared "Baruch Hashem 
for giving us the holy Shabbos!", or something like that. The idea 
caught on, and eventually became ritualized, formalized, and 
legislated into the Mitzvah D'Rabanan of Kiddush Al HaKos which we 
know today.


I once heard a Rav say, "It means a lot more when you say it with a cup of
wine!"

KT,
MYG

"D&E-H Bannett" dbnet@zahav.net.il wrote that the contradiction between the
MB and CC's actual practice derives from the fact that the CC's talmidim
wrote parts of the MB.

We have discussed this issue in the past.  Here are some snippets:

http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol04/v04n006.shtml#12 
<<To complicate things more - the Biur Halacha is where true genius is
demonstrated. But his son - Rav Aryeh Leib - claims to have written many of
those concerning hilchos Shabbos. Rabbi Elimelech Bluth - Rav Moshe
Feinsteins gabbai for many years said that Rav Moshe once told him "The
Mishna Berua was composed by a committee of Talmidei Chachomim. Therefore
it is more binding on Klall Yisroel than if composed by an individual".
>>

http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol04/v04n006.shtml#12 
Regarding my claim that not all the MB was written by the CC, someone (who
does not wish to be identified) wrote me:
<<
I was talking a while back with a local Rov - a Ner
Yisroel Baltimore graduate -  and he claimed that the MB in Hil. Pesach
is a different style than the rest of MB, and he attributed it to the
above reason - that the CC didn't write it himself, but (he said) one
cannot say it loudly.... (I had long suspected something similar, as the
MB in hil. Pesach has many phrases etc. that are word-for-word from the
SA Horav, w/o bringing a source, it may be explained by the above. VAKML).
>>

Kol tuv,
Moshe 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: winmail.dat
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 5730 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070618/f763d375/attachment.bin 

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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 23, Issue 139
***************************************

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..."