Avodah Mailing List

Volume 26: Number 89

Mon, 18 May 2009

• 1. Re: [Areivim] Tinokos Shenishbu today - opinion of GedoleiHaposkim (Ben Waxman)
• 2. Re: Modern Orthodoxy (Michael Makovi)
• 3. Waiting to Daven Maariv on Shavuous (Yitzchok Levine)
• 4. Re: Electricity (rabbirichwol...@gmail.com)
• 5. Re: Are Upsherin and Bonfires Taken from the Gentiles? (kennethgmiller@juno.com)
• 6. Re: Are Upsherin and Bonfires Taken from the Gentiles? (kennethgmiller@juno.com)
• 7. Re: Electricity (Micha Berger)
• 8. Re: german custom (Micha Berger)
• 9. Re: german custom (Micha Berger)
• 10. Re: Can I not give to a tzedakah collector if he smokes? (Jay F Shachter)
• 11. The Sin Of Reuven (SBA)
• 12. neged pshat?: maiseh reuvein v. Gm Shabbas (harveybenton@yahoo.com)
• 13. More on Not Waiting to Daven Maariv on Shavuous Night (Yitzchok Levine)
• 14. Re: Are Upsherin and Bonfires Taken from the Gentiles? (David Riceman)
• 15. Re: Are Upsherin and Bonfires Taken from the Gentiles? (rabbirichwolpoe@gmail.com)
• 16. Re: Are Upsherin and Bonfires Taken from the Gentiles? (Micha Berger)
• 17. Re: Are Upsherin and Bonfires Taken from the Gentiles? (Micha Berger)
• 18. Re: Kvitlech (Micha Berger)

Yet the Rambam lived in a community filled with Karaim. Either he didn't
warn them or he did. Is there any record or tshevua of the Rambam stating
"I told these guys the truth and they still refuse to accept it so they are
now to be considered heretics"?  AFAIK no. Secondly, I don't know what the
Radvaz means by "warned". A 30 second talk? 30 years of talking to them?
The word "warned" is certainly not is the spirit of what the Rambam writes
in Hilchot Mamrim.

Finally, I have to question exactly what is the worth of warning people
when experience shows (we do to these Karaites every day) that the results
are the exact opposite of what one would presumably want (they become
bigger heretics). Or to make the point differently - what is the point of
warning them?

Ben
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Doron Beckerman 
   
  The Radvaz writes that the Rambam would agree "If they have been warned
  to return to the strength of the Torah and they still retain their
  rebelliousness and do not want to heed, just as we do to these Karaites
  every day; and on the contrary, they become bigger heretics."
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090518/54793afd/attachment-0001.htm>

I said,
> While the Greeks were concerned with the technical details of history,
> Hazalic aggadah seems to have been more concerned with the lesson that
> could be gained from history, with the moral lesson taking priority
> over historical felicity.

One of the haverim, off-list, said this assertion is blatantly false.
I'll admit that I haven't read the Greek historians, so apparently, I
haven't the faintest clue what I'm talking about, in this regard. I
may have some extremist views, but I should hope that I'm not an
obscurantist who stands behind blatant falsehood.

So again, if anyone wants to agree or disagree, revise, magnify or
dispose of/dismantle, etc. what I said in that post (the whole post,
not just what I quoted above), please, by all means. I was more
thinking about loud when I wrote what I did.

Michael Makovi

It is time for me to begin my annual campaign to try to convince 
people that there is no reason to wait until after Tzas Ha Kochovim 
to daven Maariv on the first night of Shavuous.

Many may be surprised to learn that it was not the practice in the 
Ashkenazic world in the time of the Rishonim to wait to daven Maariv. 
Also, it was not the practice of some Achronim.

The selections at 
http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/maariv_on_shavuous.pdf are taken 
from the sefer Sheirushei Minhag Ashkenaz, volume 4, by Rabbi 
Benyamin Shlomo Hamburger.  Anyone interested in going back to the 
old-time religion and having an early minyan on the first night of 
Shavuous? If you live in Flatbush, then please let me know.


Yitzchok Levine 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090518/d862bdfe/attachment-0001.htm>

M Mirsky:
> So it's not psik raisha.The final conclusion he came to is likely only
> turning on incandescent bulbs is a malacha de'oraisa becase of heating
> the filament to a very high temperature which is "aish"

Permit me to add an electric stove/oven is generally considered "aish"
mamash or for Shabbos at least a "tol'dah". Either way AIUI both
incadescent bulbs and red-hot filaments would qualify as d'oraissos.

-RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

R"n Toby Katz wrote:
> Can we not agree that once a minhag has become so accepted
> and its origins largely forgotten, that we can forget about
> how it started and not object to it anymore?

That is an interesting suggestion. But if one is going to be honest, then
that principle would have to work in the opposite direction as well.
Speciifcally, I'm thinking about Halloween.

Can we agree that since Halloween has become so accepted among the
non-Jews, and its origins almost entirely forgotten, that we can forget
about how it started and not object to it anymore? Or more precisely, can
we reduce our "objection level" about Halloween, to the same level as that
of January 1? Or maybe even to the level of Mothers Day?

I suspect not. We object to Halloween not only because its origins happen
to be non-Jewish, but because its origins are specifically pagan. We find
ourselves unable to "forget about how it started and not object to it
anymore," because we are a people who refuses to take things at face value.
Things are always much more than they appear to be on the surface, and we
train ourselves to be vigilant of this.

On the other hand, there is also the possibility of taking something which
was originally objectionable, and "kashering" it, infusing it with kedusha
and new meaning. Like the kashering and toveling of a kitchen utensil, this
is done by carefully removing the tumah and objectionable aspects, and
replacing them them with kedusha and proper kavanos. Offhand, I can't think
of any good examples of this. I invite the chevra to suggest some. But the
cynical side of me suspects that all the examples will turn out to various
kabbalistic and/or chassidic minhagim. In fact, this whole paragraph, this
whole idea of kashering a pagan practice is beginning to sound a bit modern
and odd. Perhaps someone can suggest an example of this which predates the
Zohar.

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
Free information on a POS system that meets your needs.  Click here.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL21
31/fc/BLSrjnsCjTp36puHNDq3Gdw4JcwxKoQuqREGy9l4MZnWGMdTwnQkkt1KfZW/

R' Seth Mandel wrote:

> If one does not object to adopting new customs, then why,
> pray tell, do some groups make a big issue out of wearing
> the European fur hats (AKA shtreimels or spodiks)?  Why
> do some groups insist that on shabbos one must wear long
> coats, as the upper class wore in Eastern Europe?  Why do
> some groups insist that suits worn to shul on shabbos or
> rabbis' garb must be black?  Why insist that the children
> speak Yiddish?  The reason given for all is that "we do
> not want to change what our holy forefathers wore."

I concede that the reason for this attitude is indeed often phrased as "we
do not want to change what our holy forefathers wore." But I think you may
be taking it too literally. I think you're focusing too much on the
externals. You yourself wrote:

> And, if you adopt the logically teneble position that "I
> prefer to do what my grandfather did, but there is nothing
> wrong with other people changing their custom," then don't
> criticise other Jews for changing their dress (as long as
> it is tziusdig) or the thousands of other things that are
> condemned by the chareidi establishment as dangerous
> innovations.

Here you give what I understand to be the REAL reason: they are dangerous innovations.

The real reason for wearing black coats and speaking Yiddish is not a
romantic notion of doing what the heilige zeide did. The reason is that
pinstripe suits and speaking English put us in a precarious and dangerous
situation, where it is not so easy to fend off the influences of the
outside world. Staying in our little enclave is a lot easier.

The point of this post is to clarify what I beleive is the real reason
certain groups insist on wearing black coats and speaking Yiddish. Even
further, I understand that they wish *us* to wear black coats and speak
Yiddish; it would be for our own good (from their perspective), as it would
help insulate ourselves and Klal Yisrael from being affected detrimentally.
And I'm not convinced that they are wrong.

The part of all this which I *do* bemoan, and which I *am* convinced to be
unfortunate, is that we all too often slur our explanations until it
becomes unintellgible. For the hamon am who don't think too deeply, "we do
not want to change what our holy forefathers wore" is a much juicier
soundbite than "we're afraid of the influences of the outside world". It's
a dumbed-down version of the same thing.

It is similar to when we say "It's asur to listen to music during the 33
days of sefira", which is a dumbed-down version of "Our minhag is to not
get married during the 33 days, and we've extended that to other sorts of
simcha, like music." I understand that in many cases, we need to perform
this dumbing-down in order for the hamon am to accept it. (Compare to the
discussions we've had about citing a halacha in the name of a popular rav
who actually never said it, just to insure that the audience will obey.)
The problem is those who are capable of deeper thinking need to accept the
responsibility to translate these sayings back into their original
UN-dumbed-down versions. Taking a statement that "music is assur during
sefira" at face value will produce confusing conundrums, no less than the
illogic of not wanting to change what our holy forefathers wore at some
arbitrary point in history.

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
Click here to find the perfect banking opportunity!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL21
31/fc/BLSrjnsKoDP27gVAj5VbfZdzrfxHDAlsM9SHxPqKBCcd0pZ0dsFCLVfNFBG/

On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 10:16:53AM -0400, Michael Mirsky wrote:
: The final conclusion he came to is likely only turning on 
: incandescent bulbs is a malacha de'oraisa becase of heating the 
: filament to a very high temperature which is "aish".  But in reality, 
: fluorescent lights, LEDs etc would be OK, but as had been discussed, 
...

The problem could be havarah or bishul, as per the earlier machloqes
about glowing metal. I would also include flourescent bulbs, which also
heat a filament until it glows, that's how the electrode throws elextrons
fown the tube. The heat of the electrode is also used to boil mercury,
to raise the conductivity of the gas inside. That appears to me to be
a clear case of bishul, and a melakhah shetzrichah legufah to boot.

But then there are the other problems: makeh bepatish, whatever the CI
meant by "boneh", tiqun keli (assuming that's not an extension beyond the
original kelei zemer to include a radio or a computer that can produce
audio), etc... which still would apply to solide state devices.

: initiation of use of electricity on Shabbat has become assured by the 
: rabbanan so it's a moot point le'chatchila.  And a possible sevora is 
: a kind of a syag - people would get confused - I can turn this on, 
: but not that - and eventually turn on the wrong thing.

This is stronger than RSZA's notion of a minhag having already emerged
based on the same rationale.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 39th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        5 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Netzach sheb'Yesod: What is imposing about a
Fax: (270) 514-1507                          reliable person?

On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 07:03:31PM +0300, Shlomo Pick wrote:
: There is a German custom of Chol Kreiss, i.e. verses of the Torah read by
: youth by a male child before giving a secular (chol) name....
: The term has a combination of Hebrew (chol) and German? (Kreiss).  I doubt
: it's an original Jewish minhag or perhaps it is to give sanctity (?) to a
: non Jewish name.

I was thinking the reverse -- it's to remind the child (and his parents)
that he's a Jew, despite being about to get a German name.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 07:03:31PM +0300, Shlomo Pick wrote:
: There is a German custom of Chol Kreiss, i.e. verses of the Torah read by
: youth by a male child before giving a secular (chol) name....
: The term has a combination of Hebrew (chol) and German? (Kreiss).  I doubt
: it's an original Jewish minhag or perhaps it is to give sanctity (?) to a
: non Jewish name.

I was thinking the reverse -- it's to remind the child (and his parents)
that he's a Jew, despite being about to get a German name.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

The following question and answer appeared on our sister mailing list,
Areivim (I have brought it over to Avodah, where I think the
discussion more properly belongs):

> 
>>
>> ... my thought was that if such a person blatantly wastes money on
>> cigarettes, for which there is no purpose, then why should I give
>> him tzedaka?
>>
> 
> If money wasting is your concern (rather than health issues), then
> lechoreh there is no question that you must give him tzedaka.
> 
> After all, the gemara says that for one whose previous standard of
> living included it - such an ani must be supplied with a 'sus lirkov
> alav ve'eved larutz lefanav'.
> 

The very rich are different from you and me.  They have more money to
give to tzedaqa.

If there is a community of people who are all members of, e.g., The
Stork Club, and one of them is fallen among thieves so that he can no
longer afford his Stork Club membership, then I think it is perfectly
reasonable for the other members of his community to chip in and pay
the Stork Club membership of their friend, so that he can continue to
show his face in his community.  And I think that those who do so can
properly and legitimately think of their act as tzedaqa, and so it
will be adjudged in the Heavenly Court.

In contrast, if I pay this gentleman's Stork Club membership, I do not
think that I will be credited with the mitzva of tzedaqa.

The above-cited poster correctly paraphrases the Gemara in pointing
out that the mitzva of tzedaqa depends on the economic class of the
recipient.  Our Sages correctly understood that Nature is very easily
satisfied, and that most of our day-to-day needs are determined by
what we are accustomed to.  A corrolary is that different people need
different things.  Avraham ibn Ezra, among others, has commented on
the strange wording of the last three words of Leviticus 19:18 -- "and
you shall love for your fellow as yourself" -- which sounds as strange
in Hebrew as it does in English (most of us would have written that
phrase with an "'et", not with a lamed).  The point is not that you
must treat your fellow as yourself, since your fellow is different
from you; rather, one must love that which is good for one's fellow as
much as one loves that which is good for oneself, though they be
different goods.  I prefer champagne to ditchwater, but I do not
assert that the cosmos does, and there are trillions of mosquitos on
the planet who feel differently than I do about it.  Or, to restrict
our examples to creatures from the same species -- although just
barely -- I do not need a closet full of shoes that I almost never
wear, and which were designed by sadists, in order to know that I am
loved by my spouse, but women do, because women are weird people, and
a man who wishes to buy his wife a gift for yomtov is better advised
to buy her a pair of shoes in which it is impossible to walk than to
buy her a subscription to Playboy and a bottle of scotch.

This is all true, and in accordance with the words of our Sages, but
it is not, in my opinion, the whole truth.  I am inclined to believe
that the economic class of the giver, not just the economic class of
the recipient, defines what is and what is not tzedaqa.  More broadly,
the condition of the giver, as well as the condition of the receiver,
jointly determine whether something is tzedaqa.  I do not think that a
poor man gets credit for tzedaqa when he pays for someone's Stork Club
membership with money that would otherwise have been given to a
homeless shelter, or even with money that he would otherwise have
spent on himself.  I do not think that I am in the class of people who
can fulfill the mitzva of tzedaqa by paying for someone's yacht.  And
I would not be so quick as the second above-cited poster is to dismiss
the first poster's question.  In the United States, paying for a
moderate smoking addiction is more than twice as costly as paying for
food.  It is not at all clear to me that a man who has never smoked is
obligated to sympathize with that, or to subsidize it if he cannot.


                        Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter
                        6424 N Whipple St
                        Chicago IL  60645-4111
                                (1-773)7613784
                                j...@m5.chicago.il.us
                                http://m5.chicago.il.us

                        "Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur"

From: "Jay F Shachter" Subject: 
...  Very
often Hakkthav V'Haqqabala will come up with something entirely
plausible.  For example, the book proposes that in Genesis 38:24 Tamar
was being taken out, not to be burnt alive, but to be branded.  I
think that that is quite probably the straightforward meaning of the
verse: the branding of criminals was a not uncommon practice among
Bney Noax, and this interpretation is, moreover, proposed by other
traditional Jewish sources.
>>

Correct. The Baal Haturim beshem RY Hachosid.

SBA

RShachter: Thus, what Genesis 35:22 might be saying is that
Reuven lowered

Bilhah, and that is exactly what he did, according to our traditional

explanation of the verse, which is thus seen not to depart from its

straightforward meaning.? If he moved his father's bed out of Bilhah's

tent, then he certainly lowered Bilhah, in the sense that he degraded

her, and the actual means used to degrade her might have been

deliberately left unspecified.? Although not the literal meaning, this

could very well be "pshat".
HB: 
>The proposed explanation from Hakkthav V'Haqqabala, as you say, might
>in fact be true, but i believe it is a stretch.? One would have to
>prove 1. that the use of the verb "vayishkav"? in other places in
>chumash also means "lowering" to the exclusion of the literal meaning.
>and/or 2: that this use of the verb in the chumash, is an exception to
>the common usage. 
> Any thoughts why the chumash uses the phrase vyk ET Bilhah (and not
> vyk IM Bilaha)>Any thoughts re: roundabout usage of Gm Loshon
> (Shabbat 55) in not coming straight out and saying "Dovid didn't sin";
> "Reuven didn't sin", etc., if that is what they held???

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090518/bc24005e/attachment-0001.htm>

The following is from the Artscroll Shavuous Machzor pages 68 - 69. I 
have placed these pages at 
http://www.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/shavuous_as_night.pdf

Widespread Acceptance Although the custom of remaining awake the 
entire night of Shavuous was first recorded almost two millennia ago, 
it was observed only by small groups of scholars. Widespread 
acceptance of this custom was not realized until about four hundred 
years ago, when it was popularized by the scholars and kabbalists of 
Tzefas, who were inspired by the following incident that involved at 
least two of them, R' Shlomo HaLevi Alkabetz (Salonika, Turkey, 1505 
Tzefas, Eretz Yisrael 1584) was a paytan (Lechah Dodi), commentator, 
a leading kabbalist, and member of the circle of R' Yosef Karo, 
author of the Shulhan Aruch. The two had first met in Turkey, 
where  R' Shlomo became a disciple of R' Yosef. R' Shlomo's account 
of a Shavuos night Torah study session while he and R' Yosef were 
together in Turkey, is recorded by the Sh'la (Maseches Shavuos):

         Let it be known that the Chassid [pious man - R' Shlomo 
called R' Yosef Karo
by this title] and I, his servant, along with some of our colleagues, 
decided to
remain awake the entire night of Shavuos. Thanks to Hashem we were able to do
so. We did not cease [our studies] for a moment ...

R' Shlomo then lists the portions of Scriptures that they studied. 
After that, they began learning Mishnayos. They had completed the 
first two tractates exactly at midnight, and the following took place:

[You may see the rest on the above link.]
_______________________________________________________

Now let's assume that they waited 72 minutes after Shkia to daven 
Maariv.   (The calculations below are for this year, but I assume 
that things were not all that different when it comes to zemanim for 
the year in which the above event took place.)

 From http://www.chabad.org/calendar/zmanim.asp?tDate=5/29/2009&;c=614 
Shkia on 6 Sivan this year in Istanbul is 8:27 PM and Chatzos is 1:01 
AM.  (I am not really sure were the event described above took place, 
except that it says that it happened in Turkey.) Assuming that R' 
Shlomo HaLevi Alkabetz and R' Yosef Karo waited 72 minutes before 
starting to daven Maariv means that they started Maariv at about 9:40 
PM. They certainly did not daven Maariv quickly, so let's say it took 
them a half hour to daven Maariv and then about 10 minutes to go home 
to eat. This means that they began to eat about 10:20. Let's give 
them an hour for their Yom Tov Seudah and the return to shul. This 
means they began to learn at about 11:20 PM. Could they in reality 
have studied "portions of" the Scriptures and "the first two 
tractates of Mishnayos" by "midnight" (Chatzos) which was about 1 AM?

Unless they "davened"  through their learning, I have to assume that 
it would have taken them longer than an hour and 40 minutes to study 
this body of material. If so, then I must conclude that they did not 
wait 72 minutes to daven Maariv on the first night of Shavuous!! They 
must have davened Maariv early!!!! Only by doing so could they have 
finished davening, eaten and learned what they did by Chatzos.

All of the above is, of course, speculation on my part.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090518/fd7b7554/attachment-0001.htm>

kennethgmil...@juno.com wrote:
> On the other hand, there is also the possibility of taking something
> which was originally objectionable, and "kashering" it, infusing it
> with kedusha and new meaning. Like the kashering and toveling of a
> kitchen utensil, this is done by carefully removing the tumah and
> objectionable aspects, and replacing them them with kedusha and proper
> kavanos. Offhand, I can't think of any good examples of this. I invite
> the chevra to suggest some. But the cynical side of me suspects that
> all the examples will turn out to various kabbalistic and/or chassidic
> minhagim. In fact, this whole paragraph, this whole idea of kashering
> a pagan practice is beginning to sound a bit modern and odd. Perhaps
> someone can suggest an example of this which predates the Zohar.
>   
How about reclining at the seder?

David Riceman

Akiva:
> Can we agree that since Halloween has become so accepted among the
> non-Jews, and its origins almost entirely forgotten, that we can forget
> about how it started and not object to it anymore? Or more precisely,
> can we reduce our "objection level" about Halloween, to the same level
> as that of January 1? Or maybe even to the level of Mothers Day?
> I suspect not.

Well I actually hold that today's halloween is loosely equivalent of
the case of an aku"m being mevateil his avodah zara

IOW If the Gentiles (as opposed to us Jews) secularized it then it is
imho not AZ anymore

Disclaimer:
This is not a pesaq just a hashkafa point. I would think that any frum
yid should know better, but I think the pagan edge is not in force
anymore, it is considered merely a historical backdrop - except for
Wiccans etc.

What Jewish busnesses (eg Macy's) did with Xmas is mamash the opposite!
They took a Xtian yontiff and Jews secularized it. That bittul IMHO
doesn't work

My 2 cents
-RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 12:27:34PM -0400, David Riceman wrote:
: kennethgmil...@juno.com wrote:
: >On the other hand, there is also the possibility of taking something which 
: >was originally objectionable, and "kashering" it, infusing it with kedusha 
: >and new meaning....

: How about reclining at the seder?

Was reclining ever objectionable? Was it ever a religious act? That's
like wearing a suit (with buttons!) and tie lekhavos Shabbos.

What may be a closer example:
What about the Shabbos morning derashah, borrowed (via R) from the
Notzri Sun Morning sermon?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 39th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        5 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Netzach sheb'Yesod: What is imposing about a
Fax: (270) 514-1507                          reliable person?

On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 12:27:34PM -0400, David Riceman wrote:
: How about reclining at the seder?

Actually, I think I found a more on-the-point example. The seder
itself!

Plato, Symposium, 175e:
    So Socrates drew up and had his dinner with the rest of them, and
    then, after the libation and the usual hymn and so forth, they began
    to turn their attention to wine.

Ibid, 176e:
    Very well, then, said Eryximachus, since it is agreed that we need
    none of us drink more than we think is good for us, I also propose
    that we dispense with the services of the flute girl who has just
    come in, and let her go and play to herself or to the women inside
    there, whichever she prefers, while we spend our evening in the
    discussion of a subject which, if you think fit, I am prepared to
    name.

A symposium was a religious multi-course meal (with much wine) over
which people discussed philosophy, science and/or literature. Yes,
while reclining. The notion that chazal kashered the symposium and made
it the format for the seder is compelling.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 39th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        5 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Netzach sheb'Yesod: What is imposing about a
Fax: (270) 514-1507                          reliable person?

On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 05:02:43PM -0400, T6...@aol.com wrote:
: Since we are physical people -- and even in our Afterlife there is an  
: aspect of "bodily-ness"  -- WE need concrete objects and concrete actions...

RSRH and RYBS associate this with the hitpa'el construction of
"lehitpallel" -- tefillah is something one does to oneself. The
Maharal says something similar in Nesivos Olam I (pg 81) -- available
at <http://www.beureihatefila.com/files/Why_Pray.pdf>. His focus is
on a person being a medabeir, and therefore the perfection of self is
accomplished through dibbur, "leqabeil hashlamah min he'elah ka'asher
hu adam chaseir..."

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

PS: Thanks to RMPoppers for pointing me to the Beurei haTefillah web
site.

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 39th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        5 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Netzach sheb'Yesod: What is imposing about a
Fax: (270) 514-1507                          reliable person?


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 26, Issue 89
**************************************

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..."