Avodah Mailing List

Volume 25: Number 73

Fri, 15 Feb 2008

• 1. Re: Sefer HaChinuch on why 2 weeks Nidah for a girl andonly 1 for a boy (Rich, Joel)
• 2. Re: Hot Cheese for Shabbat Lunch (Zev Sero)
• 3. Re: Hot Cheese for Shabbat Lunch (Liron Kopinsky)
• 4. Re: Hot Cheese for Shabbat Lunch (Sacks, Avram)
• 5. Re: Does G-d Change His Mind? (hlampel@koshernet.com)
• 6. Since when? (Cantor Wolberg)
• 7. Re: Since when? (Micha Berger)
• 8. Rambam on Maaseh Merkava/Bereshit = Physics and Metaphysics (Michael Makovi)
• 9. Re: Sefer HaChinuch on why 2 weeks Nidah for a girland only 1 (Michael Poppers)
• 10. Re: Sefer HaChinuch on why 2 weeks Nidah for a girl and only 1 (menucha)
• 11. Tetzaveh "Be Careful What You Wish For" (cantorwolberg@cox.net)

 


(We have Rishonim saying that other Rishonim are wrong. No chidush. We
have Achronim saying that a Rishon is wrong if it's to come to defend
and explain the intent of a different Rishon. No chidush there either.
But saying a Rishon is wrong is a big deal.  
===========================================
 
FWIW AIUI this is something "we" have taken upon ourselves, not
something inherent in the system.
 
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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20080214/ca2e3ef6/attachment.htm 

T613K@aol.com wrote:

> We were once guests of people who served milchigs for a yom tov lunch 
> (not Shavuos) -- much to our surprise.  I would have been much too shy 
> to say anything, but my husband asked the hostess if she had a piece of 
> cold chicken in the fridge or something else fleishig he could eat.

Ah, Yomtov is different, since ein simcha (for men) ela bevasar, and
some hold that it means ordinary meat. (I'm not sure whether this
opinion counts poultry as meat for this purpose.)

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

>
> >>RTK: But never would we have had a milchig meal on Shabbos (well,
> sholosh seudos OK).<<
>

I was once at someone's house in Israel who went to a nice and early minyan
on Shabbat, came home, and had lunch, with challah, smoked salmon, cheese
etc. at 10ish. Then later, at about 4 they had another meal with real meat
(which was really good as a side note).

Two points:
1) If you are going to have one milchik meal on Shabbat day, it seems to me
that lunch is the more Chashuv out of the 2 and you should reserve the
milchik's for Seuda Shlishit. This however could be problematic in the
winter.
2) Even if you do milchik for lunch, you still need to make sure not to use
aged cheeses if you want to have fleishik a few hours later.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-a
ishdas.org/attachments/20080214/ffd0a674/attachment.html 

Hi, Toby, 

 

You wrote:  "it shows a lack of kovod Shabbos to eat milchigs for
Shabbos lunch"

 

But what is the halachic standard for "kavod shabbos"?  Is meat-any kind
of meat-the standard?  How about meatloaf?  Is that better than
herb-crusted whitefish, with lemon caper sauce and pasta?   Would
hamburger meet your kavod-dik standard where grilled salmon would fail?
Is chicken pot pie ok?   I am not such a learned person, and please
correct me if I am wrong, but I would be surprised if you could anywhere
in the Shulchan Arukh where it says that only roast chicken and/or
brisket can bring kavod to the Shabbat table.

 

Also, is it kavod-dik to stuff yourself with chicken and brisket, when
all that your body needs/wants is a piece of gefillte fish and challah? 

 

Food doesn't make the Shabbat table a shulchan and kavod is not brought
to the table by the food.  Rather, I believe it is the attitude of the
people at the table and what they say when they are there.

 

Kol tuv, 

 

//Avi

 

Avram Sacks

Chicago. 

________________________________

The halachic question of heating mac-n-cheese on Shabbos I leave to
others.  If you make kiddush when you get home from shul and have a cup
of coffee, and if you want mac-n-cheese with your coffee instead of a
Danish, that's your preference and your oneg.  (Incomprehensible
preference to me but never mind.)

 

However I want to make a different point.  There is an issue of kovod
Shabbos.  Unless you are a vegetarian and /never/ eat fleishigs, it
shows a lack of kovod Shabbos to eat milchigs for Shabbos lunch.
/Maybe/ you could get away with something very chashuv -- salmon and
brie? -- but really it should be basar vedagim vechol mat'amim.  I say
this as a person who prefers milchigs and comes from a milchig kind of
family.  But never would we have had a milchig meal on Shabbos (well,
sholosh seudos OK).  It would have been considered distinctly
not-Shabbosdig, like wearing a T-shirt and denim.  We could easily go a
whole week without eating fleishigs, but Shabbos meals must be fleishig.


 

We were once guests of people who served milchigs for a yom tov lunch
(not Shavuos) -- much to our surprise.  I would have been much too shy
to say anything, but my husband asked the hostess if she had a piece of
cold chicken in the fridge or something else fleishig he could eat.

 

Ever since then when we get invited out for a meal, my husband always
tells me to make sure they're serving fleishigs.


 


--Toby Katz

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20080214/bb43304f/attachment.htm 

Re: Doers G-d Change His Mind?Reb Micha, I got a lot hana'ah from your
clarification of the relationship between the baalei Mesorah and the
philosophic disciplines of their days. Could you please clarify this
sentence you wrote?

"The
exploration of the Torah from the perspective of what it's like to
live it rather 

than trying to identify what's "out there"
is very modern."

Zvi Lampel


 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-a
ishdas.org/attachments/20080214/040e8f81/attachment.html 

Z.S. wrote:
There's no mitzvah of simcha on Shabbos.

Then how do you explain "Yismach Moshe?"....  "Tikanta  
Shabbos...sheta'aleinu v'simcha l'artzeinu"?...  "Samcheinu haShem  
Elokeinu..."   "Yism'chu v'malchus'cha?"....    
"...kadsheinu .....v'samcheinu bishuas'cha....?"

ri
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080215/92d696a1/attachment-0001.htm 

On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 03:01:00AM -0500, Cantor Wolberg wrote:
: Z.S. wrote:
:> There's no mitzvah of simcha on Shabbos.

: Then how do you explain "Yismach Moshe?"....  "Tikanta  
: Shabbos...sheta'aleinu v'simcha l'artzeinu"?...  "Samcheinu haShem  
: Elokeinu..."   "Yism'chu v'malchus'cha?"....    
: "...kadsheinu .....v'samcheinu bishuas'cha....?"

There is mention of simchah in the tefillos of Shabbos, but not once do
we say that the simchah is simply because of Shabbos.

Rather, we speak of being happy because of the redemption:
sheta'aleinu ... le'arteinu
... be'Eliyahu hanavi
vemalkhusekha
biyshu'asekha

The only exception in your list is Yismach Moshe, but MRAH too is
described as being sameiach with something else "bematenas chelqo",
not simply because it's Shabbos.

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Nearly all men can stand adversity,
micha@aishdas.org        but if you want to test a man's character,
http://www.aishdas.org   give him power.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                      -Abraham Lincoln

On http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol25/v25n072.shtml#06 I remark that

Rambam as is well known, was essentially reconciling the science of
his day with Torah, much as many do today [Editorial addition: See Rav
Hirsch's 19 Letters which takes this for granted, and Rabbi Eliezer
Berkovits God Man and History who explains in detail. Obviously,
sources for this could be multiplied generously]. So if Aristotle (who
could
not be wrong) had proved such-and-such about Hashem or the world, then
surely the Torah concurs (for how could the Torah contradict that
which has been proven?), and so the only thing left to do is show how
everything in the Torah agrees with everything proven by Aristotle.
Those things not proven by Aristotle (such as eternity of matter,
according to Rambam) we need not be concerned with. But even there,
Rambam offered a way to reconcile Torah with eternity of matter (much
as Rav Hirsch in his Chumash rejects evolution, but offers a
hypothetical solution in his Collected Writings, to how we would deal
with evolution were it proven).

Anyway,

Rambam was of the opinion that Aristotelian philosophy was identical
with Chazal's Maaseh Merkava/Bereshit. Rambam himself said that this
knowledge has been lost, and that he had to recover it himself from
whatever he could find it. He masked much of his intent in the Moreh
Nevuchim, to avoid the proscription against teaching Maaseh publicly.

I am still amazed by the fact that Rambam wasn't puzzled by the fact
that the possessors of Maaseh Merkava/Bereshit were the Greeks; is
this not strange that the Jews lost all knowledge of this facet of
Torah knowledge, and yet the Greeks possess it abundantly? Perhaps
this was influenced by the philosophic conception of revelation, that
revelation simply gets you the information sooner, but does not reveal
anything that rational speculation could not get eventually (see
Emunot v'Deot, Hovot haLevavot; however, the former admits that
revelation is needed for precise detailed parameters of ethics and
laws, even if speculation can get you the basic gist); if Rambam
accepted this, then it is understandable how the Greeks could possess
a Jewish science. It still seems a bit strange to me, i.e. surely it
should have set off a red alarm for Rambam, for being suspicious. Be
that as it may...

It just occurred to me - this entire post was merely a lead-up to this
following point - that by conflating Maaseh Merkava/Bereshit with
Physics/Metaphysics, the Rambam has simultaneously turned Chazalic
proscriptions against teaching Maaseh, and proscriptions against Greek
philosophy, into one and the same! Just an interesting thought.

Mikha'el Makovi

In Avodah Digest V25#71, R'Micha responded to CRW:
>> That's not the reason that I teach.  A boy is one week and the reason
for 2 weeks for a girl baby is because of the potential life that girl will
eventually give birth to.  Hence, the extra week is added for the girl. <<
> A coomon theme in Tazria (Ki Sazria?) issues of parashah sheets. I
heard it attributed to the Meshekh Chokhmah, the Rogotchover and the
Tanya (ch 6), but never actually found the source. If anyone saw a
primary source, I would appreciate the mar'eh maqom. <
and R'Micha then talks about RSRH.  Well, see RSRH on 3-12:4&5, last
paragraph, re the shvua'yim.

A guten Shabbes and all the best from
--Michael Poppers via RIM pager
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-a
ishdas.org/attachments/20080214/2b75917c/attachment.html 

And of course there is the Gemara in Nida 31b,  - zachar shekulam 
smechim bo mitcharetet leshiva, nekevim shehakol atzuvim ba mitcharetet 
learbaa asar-

I always found that the harder explanation to teach...........
menucha

After the sin of the egel hazahav, God said to Moshe:  'And now permit 
me to allow my anger to burn against them, and I will consume them, and I
will make you into a great nation.' [Exodus 32:10] But Moses responded: 
'And now, if You would forgive their sin; and if not,			
erase me from the Book which you have written.' [Shmos 32:32]

The Zohar gives the following interesting interpretation:
"God overlooked Moshes' offer (to be erased from the Book).	Nonetheless
Moses was removed from one section of the Torah, the commandments regarding
the Mishkan. Which section is this?: V'ata T'tzaveh, which should have
contained Moshes' name in each and	   every word, and in each and
every commandment. However, his
name was completely omitted from the entire section. This is an example of
the "curse of a sage (being fulfilled) even when it is conditional."
[Midrash Ne'elam Shiur haShirim Maamar 4]
Thus, the teaching of the Zohar is that God took Moshe up                           on his "offer" to be taken out of  (a portion of) the book since he
challenged God to erase him from the Torah.

It seems strange to me that for someone who was considered to be
the most humble Biblical character of all time, had the chutzpah to 
say to the Almighty: "If you don't forgive them, then count me out." It
sounds like a threat. Which reminds me (l'havdil) of the story of a man who walked into the bank and took out a gun and pointed it to his own 
head and said to the teller, "If you don't give me the money, I'll kill myself."
ri


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 25, Issue 73
**************************************

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..."