Avodah Mailing List

Volume 25: Number 281

Mon, 04 Aug 2008

• 1. Revadim - Is This a New Methodology? (Richard Wolpoe)
• 2. gadol on criticism (Saul.Z.Newman@kp.org)
• 3. Re: chaplains (Richard Wolpoe)
• 4. Re: Differences between Charedism and Modern Orthodoxy (Micha Berger)
• 5. Re: Happenstance In this world (Micha Berger)
• 6. Re: Hating a Meisis to Kefirah, Should be - Hating any Jew (Richard Wolpoe)
• 7. Re: Can you build a community around Halakhic Man? - Tangent (Richard Wolpoe)
• 8. Re: [Areivim] Following Aruch HaShulchan over MB (Jonathan Baker)

On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 4:58 PM, Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org> wrote:

>
> What RYBS is objecting to is new methodologies. The question isn't
> what he would say about using game theory to explain an odd case of
> yerushah. It's more about things like revadim,
>
>
> Tir'u baTov!
> -Micha


Disclaeimer:  I am NOT an expedrt on Revadim per se...

Revadim's methodology has a number of precedents.

   1. Bach Even Ho'ezer 6 describes the Rambam's use of this method
   2. Chachmas Shlomoh [I forget where[ himself uses the term "stama
   desugyah" to desscribe the anonymous voice of the Gamara
   3. This Stam is unlikely either Rra Ashi or his son mar Bar Rav Ashi.
   This can be proven "scientifically"*   but the way the Mehsrshal uses it
   pretty much presumes that difference
   4. The Later R. SY Weinberg [my rebbe] descbied thee opening Sugya in
   Qiddushin as Saboraic
   5. When I posted the previous as radical RYGB iirc said that this was NOT
   radical and in fact the Reshash had already said the same thing
   6. R. Gorelick was not fan of the Chochmas Yisroel methodology but even
   he concede that "frummies" such as maharitz Chayes were leigtimate adovcates
   of same.  Or iow there is a "frum wissenshaft" and a non-frum or anti-frum
   wissenshaft
   7. R. MS Efldblum claimedto be foollwing inthe footsteps of D DZ Hoffmann
   8. Dikdukei Soferim has solid "frum" credentials.
   9. I queried Rabbi Dr. E Kanarfogel re: RYBS and Wissenshaft: He replied
   that RYBS was mixed. When it made sense he used itotherwise he did not.  If
   rYBS were 100% against it, I doubt his son would have pursued it.

Bottom Line:
Revadim [at leat in its most basic form]  is just putting together a series
of existing points under a new rubric> it's like saying R. Yishma;e
ORIGINATED instead of merely categorized the 13 middos of the Torah. Revadim
is perhpas no more an innovation in learning Gamara than Brisker Torah is an
innovation in how to make a hilluk.

** As far as Hiddush vs. Shinuy I am reminded of the following logic [silly
syllogism?] Lemashal

   - I enjoy my food.
   - You over-eat
   - He is a glutton

Nimshal:M

   - My Torah Is fulll of Hidushim
   - Your Ttorah is full of Shinuyyim
   - His Torah is full apikorsus


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



*The Scientific METHOD  for showing that Rav Ashi NOT being idnetical with
the Sram is simple: Just go through Shas and  show that the Stam and Rav
Ashi either disagree or are working on different assumptions.
Illustration:
The Shach takes it for granted that the Sefer hachinuch WAS authroed by the
famous Re'ah but we can show dfeeinitvely that the Hinuch in places ARGUES
with the Re'ah. And this is well articulated itneh haqdamah to the Hinuch in
the Feldheim edition.

Point?
Many POPLUAR atrributions of authroship are either wrong, misleading or
over-simplified.  E.G.:  A Rav gets up infront of a large audience and asks
"how come the Shulchan Aruch puts Hilchos Hanukkah BEFORE Purim while the
Rambam has them in reverse order? I pointed out to said Rav [privately after
the shiur was over] that the question on Maran RY Karo is misplaced because
it was the TUR who made the order. So to ask why RY Karo did not follow his
mentor, viz. the Rambam, is a specious question based upon a false premise
viz. that the SA was an orignal owrk instead of an appendage to the existing
Tur/BY. But Rabbonim will make these kinds of divrei Torah up anyway.

Another illustration of mis-leading authorship:
The Rema refers to the "tur Ho'aruch" and quotes something the TUR didn't
say. One of the nos'eio kelim picks this up and explains the Rema MEANT the
Turr WITH the [then new] BY as his Tur ho'aruch. Because in HIS day, the
Tur's new Edtions had the Addition of BY for the very first time. Hence, to
the Rema it was not the old "shor"t Tur but the NEW "long" Tur. But we would
be confused later on by what he really meant.

** When I was in Rav Weiss' YD shiur he asked a question: I gave a Hilluk.
He said: "Wolpoe, your Hilluk is TOO balebatish for me." I then flipped to
the back of my SA and found either Pri Mmegaddim or Pri Chadash  [I forget
which fruit] and I rasied my hand and pointed this out to R. Wess: He
replied: "it's STILL too balebatish"  I give him credit for being consistent
and I igve myself credit for "balebatishly" being mechavein to a simple
peshat - perhasp one that made the longer lamdus probably unncessary.
-- 
Kol Tuv / Best Regards,
RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com
see: http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080803/cca7a391/attachment-0001.htm>

http://onthemainline.blogspot.com/
on an example of r yaakov's textual criticism.  where either the nach or 
the targum needed correction, it obviously will be the targum emended...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080803/5c0b76f0/attachment-0001.htm>

On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 2:20 AM, Eli Turkel <eliturkel@gmail.com> wrote:

> <<My father was never an army chaplain (and didn't approve of Orthodox
> Jews taking that job, which involves almost inevitable halachic
> compromises) but was very involved with Jews in the military, especially
> when we lived in Newport News -- where there are several nearby military
> bases.  I mention this only to point out that not serving in the
> chaplaincy does not mean abandoning Jewish servicemen.>>
>
> Newport News is near Langley Airforce Base and also Norfolk Naval Base.
> In fact these days LAFB no longer has a local chaplain but uses one of
> the town rabbis.
>
> However, not every large and certainly not the smaller bases are near
> an orthodox community. Should we only help Jewish servicemen
> who happen to end up at bases near a orthodox shul?
>
> Being a rabbi out of town also involves compromises.
> One of the major differences between RZ and charedi attitudes
> in Israel concerns taking jobs that involve halachic questions.
> Should a good orthodox ma/woman avoid being a
> policeman, fireman or even doctor because these professions
> require occasional work on shabbat (though mutar) and because
> the professions lead to many questions.
> Should we build a society based on chilonim or goyim to fill
> all professions that involve many halachic questions?
>
>
> --
> Eli Turkel


My Yoreh Dei'ah Rebbe. R Y Weiss, recommended that we take jobs out-of-town.
keiruv is impossible w/o that attitude.  Besides the Tzaddik-in-peltz
attidute in staying in a "frum" community, there are other drawbacks.

Mei-inyana d'yyoma when the Yehuddim were originally sent into Golah, HKBH
arranged that  the Talmidei Hachamim went FIRST to make Yeshivos in Bavel
ahead of the masses. [v'es Yeshuda shalach lefanav...]
The reverse occurred itneh Bavel we call America. The Talmide Hachahmim came
later and lost millions of Jews to assimlation.  It is really important for
cadres of learned Jews be pioneers NOT followers.

I salute Rabbis Isaac Swift, Macy Gordon, Benjy Yudin, Eugene Kwallwasser
et.. al. as well as some Ba'alei Battim e.g.the late Aaron Rosenbaum OBM]
who paved the way for Torah Judaism in Bergen County.

And if  pioneers - simlar to the ones listed above - didn't do [by the Grace
of G-d] the same in Hartford, I would probably not be frum today.

-- 
Kol Tuv / Best Regards,
RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com
see: http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080803/0dae3c53/attachment-0001.htm>

On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 03:44:56PM -0400, Rich, Joel wrote:
: So we have one mention in the gemara in an unrelated context, some
: mentions that sound similar to chatan domeh lmelech, and a statement
: that the religious leaders "are able"  which may mean may step into a
: vacuum.  My question was given the torah's preference for a separation
: of powers, why wouldn't the preferred model be to continue that if
: possible.

Let's assume there is no navi to annoint a melekh. Therefore, there i no
way to restore the separations of powers right now. RDC says, and RYBS
seems to imply the same, that in such a situation, the authority falls to
raabbanim.

Yes, implied wuld be that when there's a king, the domain for listening
to daas Torah would be more limited. But that's not the scenario RDC is
trying to describe.

-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Zion will be redeemed through justice,
micha@aishdas.org        and her returnees, through righteousness.
http://www.aishdas.org
Fax: (270) 514-1507

On Sun, Aug 03, 2008 at 02:01:11AM -0400, Celejar wrote:
: I believe that some contemporary Hareidi thinkers have denied that any
: Rishonim actually reject the contemporarily popular maximalist belief
: in divine providence, but I can't see how their position can be
: taken seriously, in view of the perfectly clear language of the
: Rishonim.

OTOH, the Rambam holds of universal hashgachah. What he denies is
univeral hashgachah peratis. Epicurus believed that nature included
happenstance. Aristotle argued that nature was an expression of Divine
Wisdom. The Moreh identifies nature with hashgachah kelalis. "Mizreh",
he holds, is another term for non-obvious HP. This, at least, acording to
Sifsei Chaim, "Emunah uBitachon",

See the thread
http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/getindex.cgi?sec
tion=M#MIXED%20DANCING%20REWARD%20AND%20PUNISHMENT
from 7 years back.

-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Zion will be redeemed through justice,
micha@aishdas.org        and her returnees, through righteousness.
http://www.aishdas.org
Fax: (270) 514-1507

On Sun, Aug 3, 2008 at 9:48 AM, Doron Beckerman <beck072@gmail.com> wrote:

> Some potential differences between hating a Meisis and a regular Rasha:
>
> __


BePashtus the G'mara distinguishes between a Rasha gamur and A Rash that is
NOT gamur

Lemme give a practical case:
I have debated people on this list re: the ikar being mussar or kehilah nad
I plan to post on this in the future BEH.

In the meantime, a fellow in TEaneck was famous for his acts of Hessed on
beahlf of the community but also notroious for his gruff behaviour to many
sensitive people in the community.

In the mussar school he was a failure and in the community school he was a
gadol.  Such a person is almost be definition NEVER a rasha gamur because at
heart he has the best interests of the community. OTOH, he can be a "rasha"
of sorts in this he does hurt individuals [either emotionally or monetarily]
and has no remorse nad is not mekabbel tochacha.

We really cannot totally hate this person, but he might be sona'acha in the
case of prikah/t'einah. Becuase even when we tell him he as wrong so-and-so
no one in their right mind would shun him due to his overwhlming acts of
Hessed.

To be a Rasha Gamur AISI you gotta be out to harm the community in general,
or perhaps Judaism in general. A Self-hating Jew who is moseir, could be
such a perosn. Perhaps Bobby Fisher [had he been Halachically Jewish vai his
Mom] could have fallen under this rubric-. because he was out to hurt Jews
and Israel.

another illustration:
The Rasha at the Seder was described by Rabbi Maruice Lamm once as "a
lovable Rasha."

IOW it is NOT ok to hate Mr. Gruff ba'al Hessed - although one might avoid
him for the sake of Shalom, OTOH hating Bobby Fisher might be a mitzva. That
is how I distinguish between the simple "rasha" and the "rasha gamur".

-- 
Kol Tuv / Best Regards,
RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com
see: http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080803/871cbb72/attachment-0001.htm>

On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 11:06 AM, Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org> wrote:

>
>
> 2- Learning the product of someone else's creativity isn't the same as
> being creative.
> Tir'u baTov!
> -Micha
>

Ein hachi nami.
Tangent:
One can make an argument that learning somone else's gmara [ie. the Bavli]
is not being mekayem learning Talmud either.  Read on....

Permit me to explain, aisi, learning Dar yomi beki'us style is probably a
function of learning TSBP [iow Mishnah] but NOT Gmara, becuase one is really
following the G'mara and not analyzing davar mitoch davar oneself.

I think this explains RYBS's opposition to Bek'ius. He felt it was not
really learning. As I explain i,t is not mekayyem learning *"Gmara"* in the
generic sense [of the Rambam]. However, I think that learning Mishna in
gneral, and learning Gmara bek'ius style is still a wrothwhile endeavor, So
here I part company with RYBS.

OTOH if there is one thing that RYBS taught me is that you can analyze ANY
text.  RYBS could analyze Kinnos and make a real Talmudic dialectic on 9 Av
using the texts of Kallir. And he certainly could do the same with Humash
and Rashi, etc.  So applyingTalmudic learning is shayach with virtually ANY
text.

E.G. AIUI, the Rav would analyze the Shulchan Aruch a lot like the Gmara
would analyze the Mishna, etc. [Just as The BY himself did for the Tur.]

So the irony is,

   1. You could take a Mishna, analyze it in depth with peirushim,Tsoefta,
   svara, etc. and be mekaayyem Talmud,
   and
   2. you could breeze through the Talmud and in effect be mekayyem learning
   Mishnah

So it is not so much  the text you learn, it is HOW your learn that text
that effects the Kiyyum.

-- 
Kol Tuv / Best Regards,
RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com
see: http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080804/53315163/attachment-0001.htm>

On Sun, Aug 3, 2008 at 1:24 AM, Josh Skolnick
<joshskolnickavodah@gmail.com> wrote:
> I heard Rav Hershel Schechter, when he came to speak, say that you should
> follow the Mishna Berurah over the Shulchan Aruch because he includes all
> the lomdus of the rishonim (IIRC that was his reasoning, I will check again
> on the tape).

Over the Shulchan Aruch, maybe.  But the one who really brings all the lomdus
of the Rishonim is the Aruch haShulchan, which I've been learning for BBH.

-- 
jon baker | blog: http://thanbook.blogspot.com
thanbo@gmail.com | web: http://www.panix.com/~jjbaker
_______________________________________________
Areivim mailing list
Areivim@lists.aishdas.org
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/areivim-aishdas.org



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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 25, Issue 281
***************************************

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..."