Avodah Mailing List

Volume 25: Number 24

Wed, 16 Jan 2008

• 1. Re: FW: chemotherapy (Micha Berger)
• 2. Re: What is galut (Micha Berger)
• 3. Tamuz-Avodah Zarah-Mentioning Names only Asur if still Worshipped? (Segal Ariel)
• 4. Re: Tamuz-Avodah Zarah-Mentioning Names only Asur if still Worshipped? (Micha Berger)
• 5. Re: spanish minhagim (Zev Sero)
• 6. Re: Tamuz (Zev Sero)
• 7. Re: manipulating bodily energies (Zev Sero)
• 8. Re: [Areivim] abayudaya (Joshua Meisner)
• 9. Snake or Dragon? (RallisW@aol.com)
• 10. The Nature of Doubt (Richard Wolberg)
• 11. Re: spanish minhagim (Simon Montagu)
• 12. Re: What was actually written on the luchos, zachor (Michael Makovi)
• 13. spanish minhagim (Eli Turkel)
• 14. Re: The letter ayyin (Michael Makovi)
• 15. Re: The letter ayyin (Michael Makovi)

What are the cases we have for eis la'asos Lashem and hora'as sha'ah?

The last few times around I asked if there is a case of eis la'asos
Lashem involving a real issur and no nevu'ah.

The textbook cases are Eliyahu behar haKarmel, the writing of TSBP,
and teaching women Torah. The first involves a navi, and the other two
violate things that aren't actually called "assur". "Ee ata resha'i
le'omram ba'al peh." "Ke'ilu lomdah tiflus."

Hora'as sha'ah, OTOH, is defined in Hil' Mamrim 2:4 as the principle
of la'aqor davar min haTorah besheiv ve'al ta'aseh -- which is limited
to sheiv ve'al ta'aseh, the gezeirah being to protect something more
chamur, etc...

They therefore seem entirely different things. ELL is a protection of
Torah observance as a whole through a nevu'ah allowing a one-time
event or doing something suboptimal -- that might not even be
technically assur. HS is protection of one din (eg Shabbos) at the
expense of not doing another (eg Shofar).

SheTir'u baTov!
-micha

-- 
Micha Berger             One who kills his inclination is as though he
micha@aishdas.org        brought an offering. But to bring an offering,
http://www.aishdas.org   you must know where to slaughter and what
Fax: (270) 514-1507      parts to offer.        - R' Simcha Zissel Ziv

On Sun, January 13, 2008 2:11 pm, R Michael Makovi wrote:
: But to play devil's advocate, Rabbi Henkin in Equality Lost, in his
: essay on recognizing Hashem in history, says that those who, in the
: effort to reconcile our return to haAretz with the identity of those
: who accomplished it, say that we are still in galut, thereby empty the
: word galut of meaning.

Arguably, one of the differences between R' Teitchal and the rest of
Hungarian O was that he saw history as a source of devar Hashem.
Defending this thesis is a large percentage of Eim haBanim Semeichah.
Vayo'el Moshe instead talks about the role of the sitra achara in
history, and thus you can't know what is Hashem pointing the way, vs
Hashem letting other forces challenge us.

: I don't see how we can call the 2nd Bayit period "galut", unless we
: follow Rav Hirsch following Ohr Hashem (and Abarbanel too?) that there
: was really only one long exile, punctuated by a short intermission.
: But if one sees it as two distinct exiles, then what was galut yavan?
: You have galut bavel and galut roma, bli galut yavan.

WADR, ask Chazal, not me.

Both the four leshonos of ge'ulah as well as Dani'el's statue are
explained in terms of 4 goliyos: Bavel, Paras uMadai, Yavan and Edom.

The fact that galus Yavan occured while we were in Israel ties in well
to many vertlach told about Chanukah -- that Purim was an existential
threat, but Chanukah was a threat to Yahadus, not our physical
wellbeing.

Galus is defined first and foremost as the absence of the Shechinah,
not the absence of Jews from Israel.

...
: Anyway, while on the subject of this essay of Rabbi Henkin's...

: Rabbi Henkin never says (as far as I recall) whether he believes this
: is the beginning of our geula (but he possibly hints at an affirmative
: answer, when he says Hashem is returning us to prevent our
: destruction/dissolution/cessation/assimilation in(to) chutz
: laAretz/galut)....

R' Reines, RYBS, ROY, etc... do not define their RZ stance in terms of
messianism. The fact that R' Kooks' thought now has the plurality in
MO and DL circles doesn't mean it necessarily holds sway among the
leadership.

SheTir'u baTov!
-micha

-- 
Micha Berger             One who kills his inclination is as though he
micha@aishdas.org        brought an offering. But to bring an offering,
http://www.aishdas.org   you must know where to slaughter and what
Fax: (270) 514-1507      parts to offer.        - R' Simcha Zissel Ziv

Hello everyone. I had a question about mentioning the
names of idolatrous deities. In the Artscroll
Mishnayot Avodah Zara, there is a footnote-I forget
where-that says that the issur only applies when the
avodah zara is still worshipped today. What is the
source for this?

[Also, given that there are still small groups of
neopagans that claim to worship ancient
Greek/Scandinavian deities, does that remove the
heter, if there is one, from mentioning them?]

This is not as relevant as it used to be for me, but
when I was a teaching assistant in history of science,
I would rely on this Artscroll footnote to say, for
instance "Thales of Miletus (an early philosopher)
held that the origin of the universe was from water,
not through Zeus..."

I am about to begin Masechet Avodah Zara in my Dirshu
class, and I was interested in any responses to this
question.

Kol tuv, 
Ariel Segal 



      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

On Tue, January 15, 2008 5:24 pm, Segal, R Ariel wrote:
: Hello everyone. I had a question about mentioning the names of
: idolatrous deities. In the Artscroll Mishnayot Avodah Zara, there is
: a footnote-I forget where-that says that the issur only applies when
: the avodah zara is still worshipped today. What is the source for
: this?
:
: [Also, given that there are still small groups of neopagans that claim
: to worship ancient Greek/Scandinavian deities, does that remove the
: heter, if there is one, from mentioning them?]

Tammuz is a life-death-rebirth deity. Tablets found in the 60s tell of
him going down to redeem the sins of Inana (= Ishtar = Asheirah), his
consort. Tammuz = Dimuzid = Adonis (which really translates to Ba'al)
is then revived. Yechezqeil hanavi scolds women for mourning his death
in the shadow of the BHMQ!

Tammuz, Ishtar and Marduk (=Molekh) make up a trinity.

In a sense, much of him lives on in a very popular Western religion...

Thus, asking RAS's question in another dimension... Does the neopagan
deity identify as the old one, and if yes, why wouldn't Yeishu (who is
probably more like Tammuz than any of the neopagans managed to
reconstruct their religions)?

SheTir'u baTov!
-micha

-- 
Micha Berger             One who kills his inclination is as though he
micha@aishdas.org        brought an offering. But to bring an offering,
http://www.aishdas.org   you must know where to slaughter and what
Fax: (270) 514-1507      parts to offer.        - R' Simcha Zissel Ziv

Eli Turkel wrote:
> I am spending 3 months in Madrid and have seen several interesting
> customs.  First I learned from here, Lisbon and the Portugese shul
> in Amsterdam that they all have sifrei Torah that look like Ashkenazi
> ones and not like the round wooden covers of edot mizrach in Israel.
> They have a white sheet that goes the length of the Torah and
> protects each daf.

Lav davka white.  I've also seen red ones.  I don't think there's
a specific minhag about the colour.

What we're talking about is a silk backing for the parchment.  Behind
the continuous roll of parchment that makes up a sefer torah, is a
continuous roll of silk that rolls up together with it.

Italians also have this style of sefer torah.  You can see it at the
Italian shul in Y'm.  While there you can also see a unique style of
hagbah that I've never seen anywhere else.  The sefer torah is laid
down on the shulchan and opened, and a metal bar is attached to the
top of the atzei chayim to keep them rigid at a fixed distance.
Then *two* people facing in opposite directions pick the sefer torah
up, one at each etz chayim, and march around in a circle.  The sefer
torah is then laid back down on the shulchan, the bar removed, and it
is closed.  The bar remains on the shulchan permanently, so if you
visit the shul when they're not reading the torah you can see it but
not know what it's for.

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

Eli Turkel wrote:

> He points out that throughout early history years were dated from
> Selucid.

Seleucus Nicator.  His descendants were the Seleucids (sons of Seleucus).
Seleucus's son, Antiochus I, decided to continue counting from his
father's reign instead of starting again from his own reign as most
kings did, and that became the tradition of the family, not to start
counting again at the beginning of each king's reign.  By the time
the Seleucids lost power the count was already a centuries-old convention,
entrenched in all kinds of record-keeping and business practises, and
nobody was prepared to change it.

You will find more than you ever wanted to know about the Seleucid era
here:
http://ddc.aub.edu.lb/projects/archaeology/berytus-back/berytus08/73.html
See also Rambam Hil' Shmita veYovel chapter 10.

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

Micha Berger wrote:

> The Gra, who didn't say "Borkhuni leshalom", limited davening at a
> qever to using the qever as an emotional prod, a source of qavanah.
> Others allow asking the meis to be a meilitz yosher.

It's an explicit Zohar, which I've quoted here before.

 
> Where I would see more clear problems arising is if someone asks the
> meis to do something other than ask HQBH. To do it himself. Or "tzadiq
> gozeir ve'E-lokim meqayeim". Turning the meis or mal'akh into a force,
> a source of yeshuah, in and of itself.

How is that different?  It's still HQBH who is mekayem.  All the tzadik
does is "gozer".  Google isn't finding for me the phrase "me'achshav
maftechot haberacha beyadecha", so I'm probably misremembering the
actual words, but the concept that Hashem has given the keys of bracha
to specific people is there.  Even Bil'am Harasha had the power "asher
tevarech mevorach va'asher ta'or yu'ar".  But what does the blessing
or curse consist of?  That Hashem should do good or bad things for the
person.  I know of no hint that the person who gives the blessing or
curse has any power at all to do good or bad on his own.

Saying "the tzadik helped me" is shorthand for "the tzadik through
his brachah induced Hashem to help me".  Just as "my friend who works
at the company got me the job" is shorthand for "my friend put in a
good word for me with his boss, and that recommendation induced the
company to hire me"; if the friend did the hiring himself one would
say "my friend *gave* me the job".


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

On Jan 15, 2008 6:08 AM, Michael Makovi <mikewinddale@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I haven't studied this, but I always assumed that meant davka when reading
> the Tanach. I.e., while reading the Tanach, when the pasuk mentions a deity,
> you can say it as written.

Sanhedrin 63a as gives an example of this heter the permissibility of
mentioning the towns of Kalnevo and Gadyon, which are named after
Babylonian deities.

>  Because if any deity mentioned in the Tanach, you can say it whenever you
> want, at any time, then of what use was the assur during Biblical times?
> That assur only came into effect much much later (when we first,
> post-Biblically, encountered non-Canaanite/Babylonian deities), if you say
> that b'klal it is mutar to say any deity mentioned in the Tanach.

Who says that every avodah zarah worshipped by the goyim asher
s'vivoseinu is mentioned in Tanach?

> Alternatively, it creates a difference in the mitzvah before and after the
> Tanach was written. Was it d'oraita assur to say the name, but as soon as
> the Tanach was written, it suddenly became d'oraita mutar? That seems
> difficult, to say that Yehoshua or Yechezkel or Yishayahua or Ezra could not
> say a given name, but we can.

When the nevi'im mentioned the names, perhaps it can be considered
hora'as sha'ah - or for that matter, a direct Divine heter - for them
to be oveir the issur.  Alternatively, perhaps the issur is only to
*say* the name (lo yishama al picha), but for the nevi'im to write the
name is OK?

Joshua Meisner

When in Shemos (7:8-13) Moshe and Aharon appear before Paroah and Aharon 
throws down his staff and it turns into a "Sanin" not "Nochosh." Could the term 
sanin refer to a dragon rather than the traditional snake?
The word sanin also appears in Bereshis (1:21), "taninim hagedolim.." usually 
translated as great sea giants.   



**************Start the year off right.  Easy ways to stay in shape.     
http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp00300000002489
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080115/dd4725f8/attachment.html 

...Because they tested G-d, saying: "Is G-d among us, or not?" Then  
came Amalek, and waged war with Israel in Rephidim (17:7-8)

After all that they had seen G-d do on their behalf -- the Ten Plagues  
brought upon Egypt to free them, the splitting of the sea, the "bread  
from heaven" that descended each morning to nourish them -- how could  
the people of Israel possibly question, "Is G-d amongst us or not"?

But such is the nature of doubt. There is doubt that is based on a  
rational query. There is doubt that rises from the doubter's  
subjective motives and desires. But then there is doubt pure and  
simple: doubt that neutralizes the most compelling evidence and the  
most inspiring experience with nothing more than a cynical shrug.

Amalek is the essence of doubt, of irrational challenge to truth.  
(Thus the Hebrew word Amalek has a numerical value of 240 -- the same  
as the word safek, "doubt"). Because the people of Israel had  
succumbed to the Amalek within their own souls, they became vulnerable  
to attack by Amalek the nation.

(The Chassidic Masters)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080116/0aed98db/attachment.htm 

On Jan 16, 2008 12:43 AM, Zev Sero <zev@sero.name> wrote:
> Eli Turkel wrote:
> > I am spending 3 months in Madrid and have seen several interesting
> > customs.  First I learned from here, Lisbon and the Portugese shul
> > in Amsterdam that they all have sifrei Torah that look like Ashkenazi
> > ones and not like the round wooden covers of edot mizrach in Israel.
> > They have a white sheet that goes the length of the Torah and
> > protects each daf.
>
> Lav davka white.  I've also seen red ones.  I don't think there's
> a specific minhag about the colour.
>
> What we're talking about is a silk backing for the parchment.  Behind
> the continuous roll of parchment that makes up a sefer torah, is a
> continuous roll of silk that rolls up together with it.

What RZS said, and also lav davka the length of the Torah. The sheets
of silk that I've seen are just long enough to cover as much as is
read on any Shabbat, and are rolled into place each week.

>I don't know "who" says it but it is commonly said that the first five >are
> bein adam laMokom and the second five are bein adam lachaveiro, strongly
> suggesting a parallel structure that wouldn't be obvious if, say, four
> dibros  were
> actually written on one luach and six on the other.

Rabbi Benjamin Blech, perhaps following Rav Hirsch in his Collected
Writings (I forget which essay), says that each of the bein adam
l'chavero has a corresponding bein adam l'makom.

(1) Hashem is one <--> (6) Don't murder someone *in His image*
(2) Don't commit idolatry <--> (7) Don't commit adultery
(3) Don't use His name vainly <--> (8) Don't steal ("abduct") - I
cannot remember the relationship between these two. Can anyone figure
one out? Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that a thief
thinks Hashem isn't looking, and a vain oath-taker thinks Hashem isn't
there to give a dang? This seems weak, and I cannot remember what
Rabbi Blech says.
(4) Keep Shabbat <--> (9) Don't bear false witness (Shabbat =
testimony that Hashem created world, and violating Shabbat is thus
false testimony)
(5) Honor your parents <--> (10) Don't covet (I also cannot remember
this relationship either)

Regarding number three, I saw an interesting Pesikta d'Rab Kahana
quoted in Everyman's Talmud (A. Cohen) that interprets the prohibition
to mean not using His actual name vainly, but rather it interprets it
to prohibit a chillul hashem. The midrash says, when wearing tefillin
( = physically bearing His name) , don't do anything unbecoming of
their (or His) sanctity. Obviously, this command has nothing to do
with tefillin per se, so I'm interpreting this midrash loosely to
prohibit chillul hashem in general, with tefillin as a descriptive
example. Especially, one could say that a Jew is always bearing His
name, as a representative of His people, and thus at all times a Jew
must avoid anything unbecoming of His people. This then fits very well
with Rabbi Joseph Telushkin, who says he could never understand why
pronouncing His name unnecessarily was worthy of never being forgiven
(side note, interpreting this commandment to refer exclusively to vain
oaths, would seem to avoid this difficulty, as it is quite obvious why
Hashem would not take kindly to His name being used verbally in
pursuit of deceit), until his friend Dennis Prager said that the
literal Hebrew seemed to say, don't use Hashem to justify ( = bear His
name) an immoral deed of yours; = chillul hashem.

Mikha'el Makovi

One thing I have seen in Madrid and Lisbon and I was curious how
general the minhag is
at least among sefardim

After kiddush and before hamotzi they have a minhag to eat three foods
that have three
berachot (etz,adamah,shehakol). I was always taught to have hamotzi as
soon as possible
after kiddush

-- 
Eli Turkel

I've found the best way to pronounce the ayin according to whichever
custom it is that I'm following, is to practice making a gulp sound
like you're drinking, or a deep-throated gobble like a turkey. You
should feel your Adam's apple bob and your epiglottis open and close.
Then say "ayin" while making this epiglottal sound, but make the
epiglottal element not so strong. It should sound something like
"gayin", which the g being half pronounced and half inchoate. Which
seems right, considering that the Greeks transliterated "Amora" as
"Gamora".

Mikha'el Makovi

> I've found the best way to pronounce the ayin according to whichever
> custom it is that I'm following, is to practice making a gulp sound
> like you're drinking, or a deep-throated gobble like a turkey. You
> should feel your Adam's apple bob and your epiglottis open and close.
> Then say "ayin" while making this epiglottal sound, but make the
> epiglottal element not so strong. It should sound something like
> "gayin", which the g being half pronounced and half inchoate. Which
> seems right, considering that the Greeks transliterated "Amora" as
> "Gamora".
>
> Mikha'el Makovi

Oh, and to make a het, make it halfway between a hay and a chet. The
best way I've found, is to blow air across your palate, as if you're
wearing an orthodontic retainer and have food stuck between it and the
palate; to dislodge the food, I used to force air into that area. The
end result should sound something like a cat hissing, except not quite
so strong. It should thus be stronger than a fully aired hay, but not
as strong as a totally unaired chet.

Mikha'el Makovi


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 25, Issue 24
**************************************

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..."