Avodah Mailing List

Volume 25: Number 58

Wed, 06 Feb 2008

• 1. Re: Not Making Kiddush Between 6 p.m. ? 7 p.m. (Daniel Eidensohn)
• 2. Ramp On! (Ilana Sober)
• 3. Re: Ramp On! (Michael Makovi)
• 4. Re: Ramp On! (Michael Makovi)
• 5. Re: [Areivim] Polygamy (Michael Makovi)
• 6. Re: Why Jewish Women should NOT wear a Burka (or equivalent) (Michael Makovi)
• 7. Classes to men by women (Michael Makovi)
• 8. Women's aliyot to Torah (Michael Makovi)
• 9. Re: Women's aliyot to Torah (Micha Berger)
• 10. The influence of Nusach Sefard on Nusach Ashkenaz (Prof. Levine)
• 11. Not Making Kiddush Between 6 p.m. and 7 p.m. (Prof. Levine)
• 12. Re: Not Making Kiddush Between 6 p.m. and 7 p.m. (Micha Berger)
• 13. Re: Classes to men by women (Michael Makovi)
• 14. Re: Responsibilities to our host country (kennethgmiller@juno.com)
• 15. Re: Not Making Kiddush Between 6 p.m. and 7 p.m. (Sholom Simon)
• 16. Re: Shiluach Hakan (Rich, Joel)

The Aruch HaShulchan (O.C. 271:11) criticizes the concern for mazel - 
especially on Shabbos.

When my husband z"l was using a wheelchair, there were shuls where he never
got an aliyah because the Rav felt it was not proper kavod for him to sit
while the aliyah was read (he could stand long enough to make the brachot).
I also seem to recall a few times when he came home from shul and mentioned
that he had been the only one sufficiently prepared to lein (on a weekday),
but the Rav chose a more bdiavad solution rather than having him lein
sitting down. I don't remember all the details, and I can't quote you the
halachic sources, but I do recall that Moshe had respect for this psak and
didn't resent it.

Come to think of it, I also never get an aliyah or get asked to lein... In
both cases, kavod hatzibur, or kavod haTorah, requires "discrimination."

Chodesh tov,
Ilana
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080206/afbcad6e/attachment.htm 

>> R' Micha Berger asked:
>>
>> Why not allow the handicapped kohein serve, and use it >> as an
opportunity to teach the idea that ...
>> The fact is that HQBH didn't choose to symbolize this
>> message, but rather bowed to the least common
>> denominator of people's perceptions of the handicapped. >> And so,
I repeat, that it is not obvious why.


> Here is a partial guess, which I hope other might build >upon:
>
> Not every event is intended as an educational experience.
> IIRC, the requirement for a lack of mumim is often
> explained in terms of how distracting they are to the
> onlookers. Sometimes the experience should just be a
> simple emotional high, such as when everything runs
> smoothly and beautifully, without the distractions of
> something which is unattractive to the eye.
> Akiva Miller

Perhaps this isn't what you meant, but the following is what I
derived: a mum might distract onlookers, period. Maybe we shouldn't be
distracted, maybe we should view handicapped people as completely
equal, maybe we shouldn't stop and gawk at the strange appearances of
certain people. But the fact is, people do. Hashem perhaps said a mum
could not do the avodah, because He knew onlookers would be
distracted. Whether or not they ought to be distracted is entirely
beside the point.

Regarding your enemy in Mishpatim: famously, your enemy is described
to be a sinner, for there is a mitzvah to love your fellow, so how
could a person possibly have a stam enemy?! Elah....
But see Nechama Leibowitz: She cites Mechilta (I think) that there is
another explanation: The Torah is speaking of reality. True, there is
a mitzvah to not hate your fellow. But who says the man with the enemy
in Mishpatim is following this halacha? Maybe he stam hates the guy.
Okay, so he's doing an averah; what's difficult to understand about
that? So if a person does an averah by having an enemy, he
nevertheless bedieved shouldn't let that stop him from helping the guy
with his donkey (l'hatchila, it would be his friend's donkey, and he'd
need no mitzvah to tell him to help the guy).

I still go with the idea that it is symbolic that our avodah must be
shalem, and so Hashem said the priest must be physically shalem as a
symbolic representation. The entire point of our avodah is to
symbolize service to Hashem, so this symbolism is very fitting. Why
have symbolism of all people are equal here? This is a nice teaching,
but it can be taught elsewhere. Here, we are dealing with davka
avodah, so let's have a symbol that has to do with davka avodah.

And as was said by another, couldn't one just as well say that the
Torah should have let women be kohanim, or abolished kohanim
altogether and let everyone do avodah, if the (hypothetical) purpose
is to teach equality? Adarabba, perhaps the Torah wants to teach davka
that not everyone is equal when it comes to practical skill and
opportunity, and that some people simply can't cut certain things.
This is a lesson as important as teaching that everyone is
intrinsically equal in theoretical value and worth.

Mikha'el Makovi

> R' Akiva Miller asked to have the following completed:
> "If every ritual in Judaism was designed to teach us some sort of
> lesson," then there would be no need for chukim and the mystery of
> many of the mitzvos would be eliminated.
> ri

Perhaps Hashem wants to be sure that at least a few mitzvot train us
to follow "naaseh v'nishmah", do the mitzvah just because it's
commanded, to train us in obedience pure and simple.

But even with the chukim, people try to find rationales. For example,
in Bamidbar Rabbah on Chukat, there is a Midrash of Rabbi Yochanan
where an idolater asks what the parah adumah is, and he says it is a
magic spell. To his students, he says that the dead do not defile and
the heifer does not purify; it is all a chok from Hashem.

Now, one may interpret "chok" here to mean the mitzvah has no
rationale. But to do so, one must ignore the next clause of the
midrash: Rabbi Abuia (or something like that) says that the parah
adumah symbolizes the golden calf.

So we see, a "chok" here does NOT mean it has no rationale. Rather, it
means that the mitzvah is ein elah NOTHING BUT a symbolic rationale!
Tumah and the parah adumah have no intrinsic spiritual or physical
reality in the world; they are nothing but a symbolic teaching, pure
and simple. Rav Hirsch on the end of Tazria-Metzora has an explanation
of tumah that fits with what I have just said. It also fits with his
entire philosophy of mitzvot in 19 Letters and Horeb.

If I want into the beit hamikdash with tumah, nothing intrinsic has
just happened. Hashem could just as well have told me not to walk into
the beit hamikdash with a blue shirt or untied shoes. It is a
symbolism and a teaching, not an intrinsic reality.

Mikha'el Makovi

> I just heard RARakeffet discuss that talk by RYBS. He found a maqor from
> the Dor Revii (R' Moshe Shmuel Glasner, the Klausenburger Rav,
> greatgrandfather of our chaver, R' David Glasner) that explicitly said
> that chazaqos need to be reexamined as the realia change.
>
> SheTir'u baTov!
> -micha

Where is this? Because in his hakdamah to his Dor Revi'i, he says that
even though the Gemara bases the heter of killing lice on Shabbat on
erroneous science (viz. spontaneous generation), he says we cannot
dispute this halacha, because the Gemara is sealed and final - this
seems to be the opposite of what you say he says, unless I am
misunderstanding something.

Mikha'el Makovi

> why wearing a Burka (or equivalent) is NOT appropriate for a Jewish woman.
>
>Chukot HaGoyim

We shouldn't be looking to Muslims for how to follow mitzvot. Of
course, they can have a novel insight into something (there is a blog
on Rabbi Student that no Torah amongst the gentiles means only that
they don't have a complete Torah lifestyle and weltanschauung, not
that they can't have an occasional chiddush on Tanach), and they might
keep a certain mitzvah better than we do (Damah the gentile honoring
his father in an exemplary manner); if so, we should listen to the
gentiles in this.

But we shouldn't be copying them just to be "holier than thou" and
show that Jews are better at practicing pseudo-holy shtiut garbage
than the Muslims. This burka practice is against Torah tzniut, and so
there's no merit in showing the Muslims that we are as good as them at
shtiut. It only shows that we are as good as them in misplaced
religious fundamentalism and sexual discrimination.

I'm not quite sure this is chukat goyim, because that refers (as far
as I know) to our imitating an irrational practice of theirs for the
purpose of being like them or going with the flow or being "modern"
and "up-to-date", or the like. Here, the burka is quite rational: viz.
tzniut. Rather than being irrational, the practice is misplaced and
ill-conceived. It's certainly not an idolatrous or pagan practice.
It's simply stupid, that's all. Not to mention anti-Torah.

Mikha'el Makovi

> [3 Hesder soldiers] Locked up for 21 days because they refuse to attend training courses given
> by women.

I'm not well learned in those halachot, but is this assur? I recall
there being on Areivim recently a thing about Rabbi Riskin being put
in cherem for having Nechama Leibowitz teach classes in his yeshiva;
Rav Ovadia Yosef said put her behind a mechitza, but the implication
was that Rabbi Riskin thought this wasn't necessary.

Perhaps I am wrong in this case, but most Hesder students are more MO
than Charedi, so I would think they would be willing to learn from
women at least bedieved, certainly in a case of great need (I think
avoiding jail qualifies as need, no?).

Mikha'el Makovi

Was: [Avodah] Ramp On!, about handicapped kohanim not being able to do
avodah, and why.

Regarding someone's wheelchair-bound husband not being given aliyot to
the Torah on the basis that it is not proper kavod:
> Come to think of it, I also never get an aliyah or get asked to lein... In
> both cases, kavod hatzibur, or kavod haTorah, requires "discrimination."
>
> Chodesh tov,
> Ilana

But a friend of mine said (I don't know his source) that the primary
reason is simply that women aren't chayav to hear the Torah, and so
they cannot fulfill the reading for men. Kavod and tzniut are minor
factors according to him. Does anyone know the sources for this topic?

Aside from the previous question: I wonder, are men chayav to hear the
Torah at all? My understanding is, it is a chiyuv on the tzibur, not
on any individual (if I daven by myself on Shabbat, Monday, or
Thursday, I don't know of any issurim I've done).

Incidentally, this is supposed to be the rationale of a (supposedly)
Orthodox group (Partnership Minyan - wiki it for an in-depth analysis)
that justifies giving aliyot to women. So according to my friend's
halacha of kavod not being a factor (actually, the Partership Minyan
claims to be able to waive kavod haTzibur if the tzibur agrees to
waive it) plus my reasoning of Torah reading not being an individual
chiyuv, women's aliyot ought to be mutar...!! Where have I put
myself??!!

Mikha'el Makovi

On Wed, February 6, 2008 10:30 am, R Michael Makovi wrote:
: But a friend of mine said (I don't know his source) that the primary
: reason is simply that women aren't chayav to hear the Torah, and so
: they cannot fulfill the reading for men. Kavod and tzniut are minor
: factors according to him. Does anyone know the sources for this topic?

Kavod hatzibbur is indivisible from the lack of chiyuv. The kavod
problem isn't that a woman is leining for men. Where's the slight in
that? The kavod problem is that by having an einah metzuvah lein, it
implies that none of the metzuvim were as capable.

Tzeni'us too is related. RHSchachter writes that the only matir men
have for being sha"tz, leining, teaching, leading etc... is that they
have an obligation to make sure someone does it. In fact, someone
picked to be Chazan should view it as a personal sacrifice for the
sake of the rabbim. So, for men, tzeni'us is trumped by chiyuv. For
women, there is no parallel overriding factor.

Second, it's not clear whether the tzibbur being slighted is the
minyan in the room, or the Benei Yisrael as a whole of which they are
a unit. If the latter, there is no possibility of mechilah; it's not
their kavod to wave. That's the Magein Avraham 53:9 and the MB 59:23
(sources provided by RGS in below-mentioned thread).

But you're right, contra your friend, that the problem is NOT that of
an ainah metzuvah being unable to be motziah a metzuveh. Except
possibly a da'as yachid of the Behag by qerias megillah which may
apply here. The Behag won't let a woman lein for a man because her
chiyuv is derabbanan and his is greater, midivrei soferim. Lo kol
shekein where it's no chiyuv vs divrei soferim.

See also R' Mendel Shapiro's
<http://www.edah.org/backend/JournalArticle/1_2_shapiro.pdf> which
surveys all the issues, and
<http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/getindex.cgi?section=W#WOMEN%20READING%20MEGILLAH%20FOR%20MEN>.

SheTir'u baTov!
-micha

-- 
Micha Berger             "Man wants to achieve greatness overnight,
micha@aishdas.org        and he wants to sleep well that night too."
http://www.aishdas.org     - Rav Yosef Yozel Horwitz, Alter of Novarodok
Fax: (270) 514-1507

At 09:57 AM 2/6/2008, you wrote:

>Two things that I see as areas where N"S has influenced N"A;
>
>Not wearing Tefillin on Chol HaMoed all together, taking the tefillin off
>before Musaf on Rosh Chodesh.
>
>Having more than one person say kaddish at the same time.

I daven Nusach Ashkenaz and I put on Tefillin on Chol Moed, although 
without a brocha.  This was the almost universal custom in Chutz 
L'Aretz, as far as I know. I know that the GRA and his followers did 
not put on Tefillin on Chol Moed. There may be some others. However, 
today, due to the Chassidization of Yiddishkeit, there are a number 
of people who have stopped putting on Tefillin during Chol Moed. Part 
of the reason may be that if one davens in a place where most do not 
put them on, then one feels uncomfortable about putting them on. (I 
am talking about a place where people do not put on Tefillin, but 
they allow some to do this.) Another reason may be sheer "laziness." 
It is easier not to put them on during Chol Moed.

I was told that in the Telz yeshiva in Cleveland, anyone who did not 
wear Tefillin during Chol Moed could not daven in the BM!

I heard Rabbi Bamberger of Sherushei Minhag Ashkenaz fame say at a 
talk that in the time of the Rishonim many did wear Tefillin during 
Musaf of RH. He said that the custom of taking them off before Musaf 
stems from the fact that the some places say Keser during kedusha and 
that one should not have two crowns.

There are still places where only one person says Kaddish. For 
example, at KAJ in Manhattan. My understanding is that the saying of 
kaddish by more than one person came about as a way of avoiding 
fights over who should say a given kaddish.  Where I daven the 
instituted a new thing about a year ago. All of those saying kaddish 
go to the Shulchan and say kaddish together. Rav P. M. Teitz 
instituted that all mourners should come to the front of the shul 
when they say kaddish. He did this some time between 1968 and 1974, 
while I was living in Elizabeth, NJ.

At 09:57 AM 2/6/2008, you wrote:

>I understand the source from this is Shabbos 129b.
>
>In fact, there's a nice little chart in the Artscroll Gemara on daf
>129b1.  It shows that Ma'dim influences on Fridays between 6-7 pm.
>
>However -- it also shows other times where Ma'dim is influential --
>for example: Wednesdays between 10am and 11am (or Sundays from
>noon-1pm).   So, suppose a Yom Tov is on a Wednesday (or Sunday),
>would/does anybody refrain from kiddush between those hours?
>
>-- Sholom

What I have never understood is why this is a 60 minute hour and the 
time is based on the "secular" clock. To the best of my knowledge, 
the 60 minute hour is not "generic" to Halacha. The times of the day 
are based on Shaos Z'manios. So why aren't Shaos Z'manios used in the 
determination of what between 6 and 7 means, rather than secular 
time. For the record. the 60 minute hour goes back to the Babylonians 
whose number system used base 60.

Yitzchok Levine 

On Wed, February 6, 2008 11:03 am, Prof. Levine wrote:
: What I have never understood is why this is a 60 minute hour and the
: time is based on the "secular" clock. To the best of my knowledge,
: the 60 minute hour is not "generic" to Halacha. The times of the day
: are based on Shaos Z'manios. So why aren't Shaos Z'manios used in the
: determination of what between 6 and 7 means, rather than secular
: time. For the record. the 60 minute hour goes back to the Babylonians
: whose number system used base 60.

A couple of us were once invited to a shtiebl to run a singing minyan
for Qabbalas Shabbos and Maariv. The rav was getting antsy at a few
minutes to 6 EDT, when the baal tefillah started singing Mizmor
leDavid before the 2nd Borkhu. He ended up calling his wife and
daughters down for qiddush in shul before Aleinu.

Not sure of the point of RYL's last sentence, since the Babylonian
minute was 1/60 of a sha'ah zemanis, not a standard hour. For that
matter, we had a unit that was 1080 of a standard hour already, with a
mesorah that it's miSinai (or perhaps "misinai").

Also, our clocks are set according to time zone, not local time. 12:00
is the middle between sunrise and sunset averaged over the year in the
middle of the time zone (barring places like India, which are 30 min
off), not as per where you're sitting.


SheTir'u baTov!
-micha

-- 
Micha Berger             "Man wants to achieve greatness overnight,
micha@aishdas.org        and he wants to sleep well that night too."
http://www.aishdas.org     - Rav Yosef Yozel Horwitz, Alter of Novarodok
Fax: (270) 514-1507

> Perhaps I am wrong in this case, but most Hesder students >
> are more MO than Charedi, so I would think they would be
> willing to learn from women
>Mikha'el Makovi

Indeed, later in Areivim, it was said

>The rosh yeshiva of the hesder yeshiva **agreed** with the
> army that what the boys did was uncalled for.

Mikha'el Makovi

Someone asked:
> I wonder where within the definition of hakarat hatov
> is the chiyuv to vote (which is a voluntary act) found?

If one receives a gift, and he is truly grateful for it, but there is no specific person or group to whom he can vocalize his "thank you", then how can he express that gratitude?

It has always seemed to me that in such cases - and perhaps even when there *is* a person to thank - one of the best things he can do is to USE that gift.

(I developed this idea while thinking about why suicide is wrong: it is a rejection of G-d's gift of life. It is intriguing to me to have applied a similar logic to the importance of voting, as an expression of gratitude to the government which allows us to vote.)

Akiva Miller
_____________________________________________________________
Click for free info on marketing degrees and make up to $150K/ year
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2121/fc/Ioyw6i3l7sR1S2Apm20RN86puCxdHUNtuJ6yiTeFHdUKUQDNwpNY62/

> What I have never understood is why this is a 60 minute hour and the
> time is based on the "secular" clock. To the best of my knowledge,
> the 60 minute hour is not "generic" to Halacha. The times of the day
> are based on Shaos Z'manios. So why aren't Shaos Z'manios used in the
> determination of what between 6 and 7 means, rather than secular
> time.

I don't know the actual reason, but I could posit one that seems intuitive
to me.  The Shaos Z'manios are based on the sun.  But this "influence" of
various planets are not.  If we go by the stars (ignore that these planets
are not what we call stars today) it makes more sense to use a fixed hour
than a solar-type hour.

But on my question, we digres . . . . <g>

-- Sholom

 Now I am aware of the promised rewards for shiluach hakan but I cannot
believe we are supposed to be tramping through woods frightening birds
to secure long life.


Alan Rubin
_______________________________________________
Actually IIUC it is also believed to be a segula for children.

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.



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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 25, Issue 58
**************************************

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..."