Avodah Mailing List

Volume 24: Number 75

Mon, 26 Nov 2007

• 1. Re: Fables and Lies (Moshe Y. Gluck)
• 2. Re: Apikores? (Moshe Y. Gluck)
• 3. Proofs of God BACK TO EILU V'EILU... (Richard Wolberg)
• 4. Kashrus Question Chametz sh'avar alav haPesach (Richard Wolberg)
• 5. Re: Kashrus Question Chametz sh'avar alav haPesach (Zev Sero)
• 6. Re: Fables and Lies (T613K@aol.com)
• 7. Re: proofs of G-d (T613K@aol.com)
• 8. Re: Fables and Lies (Arie Folger)

R' Akiva Miller:
> My gut reaction is to scream, "No! It is too dangerous! How will they
> react when the lie is discovered!" But that consideration does not seem
> to have bothered those who chose to include Ayleh Ezk'rah in the
> machzor.
R' Joel Rich:
> Ayleh Ezk'rah - even R' Scroll had little choice given the mesora as to
> when these individuals lived.  While our guts are in alignment, I
> suspect klal yisrael has paskened differently, perhaps along the lines
<SNIP>

I don't understand the problem. Eileh Ezkerah is poetry, not a historical
document. The Payit is using poetic license to amplify the feelings of
sadness for the tragedies that have befallen Klal Yisroel. 

Put differently, so many people have no problem with saying that the first
Perek in Bereishis is not to be taken literally, and this is a problem?!

KT,
MYG

R' Marty Bluke:
> When the brothers are planning on killing Yosef, Reuven saves him by
> suggesting throwing him into the pit. The mefarshim ask what did
> Reuven accomplish, the pit was very dangerous (full of snakes, etc.),
> even life threatening. The Or Hachaim and the Alshich both answer as
> follows. A person has bechira chofshis and therefore the brothers
> could kill Yosef even if he was not supposed to die. However, animals
> since they have no bechira chofshis they cannot kill someone if he is
> not supposed to die. In other words, bechira trumps hashgocha pratis.

The fact that the RBSO lets Yankel be Bocher to kill Berel doesn't mean that
a) it wasn't part of the master plan, or that b) Hashem can't stop Yankel
should He want to. Looking at it another way, should Berel not Daven or
fight back because of the fear of limiting Yankel's Bechirah? (Chazal
certainly didn't think that - Afilu Cherev Chadah...) Looking at it a third
way, the world runs on Teva. Does that mean that Nisim can't happen?
Personally, I like the way the Chazon Ish puts it - when someone is in
trouble he should realize that it is just as likely that the positive
outcome happen, as the negative one. 
R' Eli Turkel (as well as R' David Riceman) mentioned the Tzaddik V'ra Lo
and Rasha V'tov Lo in this regard in an earlier post: 
> For humans it conflicts with the old idea of good and evil. I find it
> hard to believe that
> the truly evil people who live to 100 have a some virtue that the
> kollel boy who dies at 20 has.
> Furthermore, it is obvious that eating well, exercise and other
> healthy habits causes a person
> to live longer while shemirat mitzvot has no such obvious effect.
<SNIP>
> The idea that people perished in the Holocaust because because of
> their sins seems absurb.
> In worse is to claim that the great rishonim died in the crusades
> because of their sins or the
> various great rabbis that died through gezerot Tach ve-Tat
> (Chemilnikzi).
It seems to me that Chazal understood this issue by explaining that
Tzaddikim and Reshaim are neither judged by the same standards, nor rewarded
or punished in the same way. I think that all your points can be explained
away that way.  
Earlier, R' Eli Turkel wrote:
> Mainly because it goes against common sense and modern science.
> We know from physics that objects fall due to gravity. According to
> the Baal Shem Tov
> no leaf falls or any action occurs without G-d decreeing it.
> Seems somewhat silly for G-d to decree what we know will happen anyway.
Why will it happen anyway? Who said that there would be gravity without the
RBSO decreeing that it be there every second? It seems pretty clear L'chol
Hadei'os (that I'm aware of) that if the RBSO would stop actively being
Mechayeh the world every instant it would be Chozer L'Tohu Va'vohu. The laws
of physics are part of the world, and so are you and I. Tomer Devorah
(1:1-2) puts it well (for another kabbalistic POV supporting Hashgachah
Pratis) when he says that the RBSO actively keeps a person alive even though
he had aveiros, when Shuras Hadin would require that Hashem remove his
support for the actions against him.   

KT,
MYG

The following two comments are a great illustration of the "black and white"
philosophy, the first statement, and the "shades of gray" philosophy, the
second statement.

1)  You have two choices. Either it's a fact, or he was a liar...

 

2)  Or he was mistaken. Or words were attributed to him that he never said.

Or, he said "as if", and his talmidim missed those two words in the
retelling. Or...

 

I've always had a problem with the "either black or white" philosophy which
borders on seeing things as being too simplistic. Life is much too complex
and therefore it appears the safer approach is the "shades of gray"
philosophy. 

 

We've all heard about: "your version", "his version" and the truth lies
somewhere in between. Obviously, that's an oversimplification also. But to
say one is either telling the truth or is a liar can be quite inaccurate and
unfair. We all have perceptions, and just because my perception is different
from yours, does not mean that one of us is right and the other wrong.

Back to eilu v'eilu.

 

Kol tuv/Best regards,

ri

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/private.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20071125/1b56502b/attachment-0001.html 

Prof. Levine asked:

What is the kashrus status of donuts sold during Pesach at such a store?

One can ask similar questions about the plants that produce Thomas's and
Arnold's baked goods during Pesach. I believe, but I may be wrong, that
these products, having been baked on Pesach, appear in stores during Pesach
with an OU on the label. If so, what does the OU on the label imply?

 

Halacha is quite clear that bread baked on Pesach by a Jewish owned firm may
never be consumed after Pesach. As well, the purchase of bread immediately
after Pesach from a non Jewish establishment is forbidden if it were baked
during Pesach.

 

Kol tuv/Best regards.

ri 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/private.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20071125/1125ae17/attachment-0001.htm 

Richard Wolberg wrote:
> Prof. Levine asked:

>> What is the kashrus status of donuts sold during Pesach at such a store?
>> 
>> One can ask similar questions about the plants that produce Thomas's and
>> Arnold's baked goods during Pesach. I believe, but I may be wrong, that
>> these products, having been baked on Pesach, appear in stores during Pesach
>> with an OU on the label. If so, what does the OU on the label imply?

> Halacha is quite clear that bread baked on Pesach by a Jewish owned firm may
> never be consumed after Pesach.

Indeed, but what has that to do with the question?

> As well, the purchase of bread immediately
> after Pesach from a non Jewish establishment is forbidden if it were baked
> during Pesach.

Huh?  Since when?  And why?

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

 
 
From: R' Akiva Miller _kennethgmiller@juno.com_ 
(mailto:kennethgmiller@juno.com) 


RAM: >>In the thread "proofs of G-d", we were discussing the  scenario that 
some gedolim posit a linkage, that a specific tragedy was caused  by a specific 
failing, and that they do this in order to inspire people to do  teshuva, 
even though those gedolim are not neviim, and cannot say for a *fact*  that this 
failing caused that tragedy.<<
 

TK:  I don't think that any rav should say there is a link  unless he really 
believes there is a link, just to "inspire people to do  teshuva."  Of course 
he may believe there is a link and he may be  mistaken, even horribly mistaken 
-- and others may argue vehemently against  linking tragedy X with sin Y -- 
but if he genuinely believes there is a link  then you can't say he's telling a 
"lie."  A mistake or misinterpretation is  not a "lie."  


>In this context, R' Ben Waxman wrote in that thread:
>  There is an even bigger problem that my wife pointed out to
> me: When  positing an cause and effect when in fact no one
> really knows the cause,  the people who are motivated to repent
> will basing their avodat Hashem  based on a fable, and maybe
> even on a lie. Do we really want that?
 
TK:  No we don't want people to base their avodas Hashem on fables and  lies.

RAM:  >>At this time of year, it is common for American  Christian families 
to teach their children a particular such "fable and lie", in  order to 
motivate those children to good behavior. This is so widespread, in  fact, that it is 
a rite of passage when those children come to learn the truth  of this 
fiction.

For many years, I was particularly proud that all of the  Midrashim, legends, 
and stories which we tell our children are true. And even if  an occasional 
story might appear with different details in different versions,  the main 
thrust is generally accepted as genuine. Torah Truth has no need for  fiction.<<
 
TK:  I had a long debate/discussion with a giyores about this some  years 
ago.  She said that our telling children that Eliyahu Hanavi comes to  every 
house on Pesach was no different than telling kids about Santa Claus or  the tooth 
fairy.  My contention is that the people who tell their kids  about Eliyahu 
Hanavi really believe themselves that he comes, and if they don't  believe it 
they shouldn't say it, or they should couch in general terms like,  "There is a 
/tradition/ that Eliyahu Hanavi comes to every house."  Of  course it is 
actually possible that he really does come to every Jewish  home -- he is 
presumably at this time an incorporeal being, no longer  subject to the constraints of 
space and time.  At any rate no parents are  dressing up as Eliyahu Hanavi 
and walking in the door when the door is opened  for Shfoch Chamascha.   If 
parents did dress up as Eliyahu Hanavi and  let the kids think they really did see 
Eliyahu Hanavi walk in their door, they  /would/ be perpetrating a lie, but 
no one has such a minhag.
 
As for other midrashim: 1. many people believe all or most midrashim really  
are true so they are not "lying" when they teach them to their kids
2.  I myself try to add, "That's a midrash" when I tell a story,  
distinguishing it from "That's in the Chumash" -- and when they are old enough  to 
understand the distinction, I tell my kids that not every midrash is  necessarily 
literally true,  but every midrash has an important lesson to  convey.

RAM:  >>And then, one Yom Kippur, during Ayleh  Ezk'rah, I chanced upon a 
comment by ArtScroll. The same who is so often derided  on these pages for taking 
a sanitized version of history, and passing it off as  true. And even Rabbi 
Scroll had to admit:

> that while all ten of  these righteous men were murdered by the
> Romans, their executions did  not take place simultaneously, as
> described here, nor could they have,  since two of the ten did
> not even live in the same generation as the  other eight.
> ...
> The liturgical accounts of the martyrdom were  not meant as
> historical records, but as dramatic accounts of the story,  in
> order to evoke feelings of loss and repentance on the part of
>  the congregation.

So it's not just the Christians. We too have fables,  fictions, and lies. 
Perhaps it is only this one solitary example. But one is not  zero.<<
 
TK:  All ten of the asara harugei malchus were actual historic figures  who 
really were martyred by the Romans.   Why does the fact that a  poem puts them 
all together constitute in your mind a "fable, fiction and  lie"?  I just 
don't see it that way at all.

RAM:  >>My  heart is still not fully healed from the pain of this 
disillusionment. And I  apologize if this post has disillusioned any others. <<
 
TK:  Forgive me for saying this but you are much too sensitive.   Your 
standards of absolute honesty are also impossible for anyone to meet.   Poetry is 
not history but in this case it is most definitely based on  history.  Plus I 
would not be surprised if the payetan who put all ten  martyrs together actually 
thought they did live at the same time -- they  didn't live so far apart from 
each other, after all.   He wasn't a  historian, either.  Only historical 
research in the last hundred years or  so has really clarified exactly who lived 
where and when, 2000 years  ago.   What if 500 years from now someone thought 
the Besht and the  Chofetz Chaim lived at the same time and wrote a story 
about them, say, talking  to each other?  Would that be a "lie"?  Would it 
invalidate everything  the Besht and the CC taught?   Would a writer taking some 
liberty  with the facts -- because of his own ignorance, or for literary reasons 
--  would that turn historical personages into mere legends, as if they had 
never  lived? 
 
 

>> To repeat [RBW's] question:
> the people who are  motivated to repent will basing their avodat
> Hashem based on a fable,  and maybe even on a lie. Do we really
> want that?

RAM:  My  gut reaction is to scream, "No! It is too dangerous! How will they 
react when  the lie is discovered!" But that consideration does not seem to 
have bothered  those who chose to include Ayleh Ezk'rah in the  machzor.<<

TK:  And again, I think you are being too  sensitive.  Eilah Ezkarah is not a 
"lie."  Do the notes to the  A/S machzor say that they never lived and were 
never persecuted and were never  killed by the Romans?  No it does not.  I 
think the A/S is to be  commended for acting like adults and not trying to fudge 
the fact that this poem  is just that -- a literary device.  BASED ON A TRUE 
STORY -- or actually,  ten true and tragic stories.
 




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




**************************************Check out AOL's list of 2007's hottest 
products.
(http://money.aol.com/special/hot-products-2007?NCID=aoltop00030000000001)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/private.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20071125/465f480c/attachment.html 

 
 



<that Hashem exercises constant hashgacha over each and  every
individual, moment  by moment, and that He has His reasons <why  He
will sometimes protect people from  harm, and at other times  not.  In
times of hester panim, His hashgacha  /appears/ <random  and removed. [--old 
TK]

R' Marty Bluke:  >>Both the Rambam and  the Ramban explicitly disagree with 
you. They
write that a person who is not  close to hashem will be exposed to
mikreh, chance.

Meshech Chochma(  Shemos 13:9) sums it up as follows:

"Divine Providence is manifest for  each Jew according to his spiritual
level as the Rambam explains in Moreh  Nevuchim (3:18): Divine
Providence is not equal for everyone but rather is  proportional to
their spiritual level.....
The same category as animals means that they have no hashgacha pratis at  
all.<<


>>>>>
I just always understood that to mean that from the point of view of us  
humans, ordinary people (and animals) /appear/ to be subject to mere  chance.  But 
"He is hiding behind the wall."  Hiding in the laws of  nature that He set 
up, hiding in the perturbations of the Butterfly's Wings of  chaos theory, 
hiding in the statistical probabilities of quantum mechanics,  hiding in the 
weather forecast ("30% chance of rain tomorrow, with a 100% chance  that Yankel will 
get soaked").
 


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




**************************************Check out AOL's list of 2007's hottest 
products.
(http://money.aol.com/special/hot-products-2007?NCID=aoltop00030000000001)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/private.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20071125/99e3dc9e/attachment.htm 

RAMiller wrote:
> And then, one Yom Kippur, during Ayleh Ezk'rah, I chanced upon a comment by
> ArtScroll. The same who is so often derided on these pages for taking a
> sanitized version of history, and passing it off as true. And even Rabbi
> Scroll had to admit:   
> > that while all ten of these righteous men were murdered by the
> > Romans, their executions did not take place simultaneously, as
> > described here, nor could they have, since two of the ten did
> > not even live in the same generation as the other eight.
> > ...
> > The liturgical accounts of the martyrdom were not meant as
> > historical records, but as dramatic accounts of the story, in
> > order to evoke feelings of loss and repentance on the part of
> > the congregation.

This is not universally agreed upon. For an extensive treatment, see the book 
(published by Mossad haRav Kook) 'Assarah Harugei Malkhut beMidrash uvePiyut.

First of all, there are at least twenty eight different texts (piyutim), some 
of which are old, others newer. All of them contain details not in the Talmud 
and/or Midrash. The twenty eight different piyutim presented in that book are 
based on underlying sources which aren't sufficiently clear. I am talking 
about the Talmudim and Midrashim. In the Bavli, the ten don't appear 
together, in none of the underlying texts do we have all ten.

Now the issue of interpretation: we are used to Eleh Ezkera, which is indeed 
hard to maintain historically. However, the ten people aren't unambiguously 
identified. For example, who is this Rabbi Yishmael Kohen Gadol? Who is 
Rabban Shim'on? Were they contemporaries of Rabbi 'Aqivah? Hence, some 
authorities maintain that all died in the Hadrianic persecutions (that being 
the closest to Eleh Ezkerah), others say in the aftermath of the 'Hurban. A 
third group says that which you saw from Rebbe Arthur Scroll ;-). More 
distinct interpretations are possible.

Interestingly, we don't say Eleh Ezkerah on YK (but do say it during 
selichot), while we do have in our minhag a kinah on the 10 harugei malkhut. 
I bothered comparing the texts and they don't accord with each other. Perhaps 
that is the reason why we skip the perhaps textually more problematic Eleh 
Ezkerah.

Do note also, that while Eleh Ezkerah's first paragraph refers to the 
listening behind the pargod and hearing that the whole matter is a heavenly 
decree, and the connection with Yossef's sale, are both based on a Midrash, 
but not known from elsewhere. Indeed, many versions of the 10 martyrs do not 
have that part. In Ashkenaz, even those who did say Eleh Ezkera were more 
likely to skip that first paragraph, and IIRC R?delehim doesn't even print 
it.

So, I wouldn't call the general story of the 10 martyrs either a fable or a 
lie, but some versions are indeed difficult.

I pray that textually, I have rescued [the story of] the 10 harugei malkhut a 
little bit ;-),
-- 
Arie Folger
http://www.ariefolger.googlepages.com


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 24, Issue 75
**************************************

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..."