Avodah Mailing List

Volume 27: Number 158

Mon, 09 Aug 2010

• 1. Re: davening outdoors (Zev Sero)
• 2. Re: Mussar vs. Chassidus (David Riceman)
• 3. davening outdoors (Eli Turkel)
• 4. changing nusach (Eli Turkel)
• 5. Re: Tzedakah: Giving to an organization vs. giving privately (T613K@aol.com)
• 6. Re: Leshon haKodesh (Hankman)
• 7. Re: changing nusach (Moshe Y. Gluck)
• 8. Re: Tzedakah: Giving to an organization vs. giving privately (Moshe Y. Gluck)
• 9. Re: Leshon haKodesh (Zev Sero)
• 10. vegetarianism (Eli Turkel)
• 11. Re: davening outdoors (Danny Schoemann)
• 12. Netziv on Monarchy (Micha Berger)
• 13. STAM Not Glatt! (Danny Schoemann)
• 14. Re: vegetarianism (Micha Berger)
• 15. Re: STAM Not Glatt! (Akiva Blum)
• 16. Re: Tzedakah: Giving to an organization vs. giving privately (Micha Berger)

Danny Schoemann wrote:

> Kitzur SA 18:8:  ?? ????? ????? ???? ???? ????, ???? ?????? ?????
> ??????, ??? ???? ???? ????, ???? ???? ?????. ??? ??? ???? ???? ??
> ?????? ????, ??? ???? ??, ????? ??? ???????

> Interesting query: what if he can concentrate better outside since
> it's too hot/stuffy inside.

There are plenty of outdoor places that are enclosed, and thus not
field-like.  Many shuls have a yard of some sort, where they put up
the sukkah.

-- 
Zev Sero                      The trouble with socialism is that you
z...@sero.name                 eventually run out of other people?s money
                                                     - Margaret Thatcher

RTK
: I think that chassidus has much more warmth and heart than does mussar, and
: there's a good reason why the one attracted hundreds of thousands while the
: other attracted...dozens.  That was in Europe and kal vechomer in  America.

RMB
<<It's not a competition. As have been said by a couple of different
people on the RSFM and RSRH thread -- there is no one derekh that works
for everyone.>>

One of my friends once asked R. Dov Katz's son why there are so many 
more Hassidim than mussarniks.  R. Katz answered that there aren't; it's 
just that it's more fun to be a failed Hassid than to be a failed 
mussarnik, so there are a lot more of those.

David Riceman

"One should not pray in a open area like a field, since in a private
place the fear of The King is upon him and his heart is broken and
subdued."

"And if he's on the road he may travel in the field, though if
possible he should stand between the trees."

Interesting query: what if he can concentrate better outside since
it's too hot/stuffy inside.>>

ROY did not quote this KSA and I assume does not hold of it.
Again he said that first priority is to daven in a shul. But if one is on
a trip and it is not feasible then he allowed davening outdoors and did
not mention anything about standing between trees.

In my experience of traveling in EY it is common to see groups
of religious Jews of all stripes davening mincha outdoors and I dont recall
people looking for trees

-- 
Eli Turkel

I have an article in the Journal of Halacha and
Contemporary Society, 1989 on changing
between Ashkenaz and Sefard

-- 
Eli Turkel

 
In a message dated 8/5/2010, doni...@gmail.com writes:

>  People need a combination of mind and heart to inspire them.    I  really
> think that thinking about Adon Olam just won't cut  it.  However,  si
nging Adon
> Olam to a beautiful melody --  just might. [--TK]

Since when do "fuzzy warm" feelings have any weight  in Yiddishkeit?

Having lots of happy frumly-dressed people cannot trump  a handful of
people being meticulous in all areas of Halocho.

No  amount of singing will improve your practical knowledge of  Halocho.

 
>>>>>
 
 
RMB's post was not about halacha but about hashkafa.  If you want to  know 
what your  halachic tzedakah /obligations/ are, you wouldn't determine  that 
by contemplating the words of Adon Olam.
 
I understood RMB to be saying, or at least implying, that he was thinking  
about the general obligation to be "like Hashem" -- mah Hu rachum, af atah  
rachum and so on.  This is not the same kind of "obligation" as the  
requirement to eat a certain amount of matza at the seder.  By its nature  it is 
hashkafic more than halachic, and one aspect of this issue is the question  of 
what will, in fact, induce or motivate a Jew to be more "G-d-like"  or 
"G-dly" in his daily behavior?
 
"Since when do 'fuzzy warm' feelings have any weight in  Yiddishkeit?"


Since Hashem gave us a Torah that is chock full of poetry  comparing the 
relationship between Hashem and Klal Yisrael to the warm and  loving 
relationship  between a chassan and his kallah, or between a  father and his children.
 

--Toby Katz
==========



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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100805/4cd0e731/attachment-0001.htm>

RZS wrote:

 At the time the
Torah was written, perhaps "yishgalenah" was still thought of as clean,
but at some later stage it became dirty so the sofrim instituted a
kri that was even more indirect and thus cleaner.

RAH wrote:

Where does Rambam say this? I wonder how he gets around Megillah 25b,
where it is explicitly stated that "qri" renders objectionable terms in
"ktiv" acceptable for reading in public.

CM notes:

I think some of the posts here are mixing two different concepts and
treating them as one. To  my understanding (I have no specific cite) Kri
and Ksiv are halacha leMoshe miSinai (at least in Chumash if not in Nach).
Whereas the subject matter in Megilla 25b, (Mishna and gemara) refer not to
Kri and Ksiv, but to Kriah and Targum, not the same as Kri and Ksiv and
likely of Chazal's origination based on the meaning at the time as others
have noted.

Kol tuv

Chaim Manaster
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100805/6b2a3119/attachment-0001.htm>

R' YL:
>> I believe the Reb Moshe has a teshuva in which he says that one can
>> switch  from Nusach Sefard ... to Ashkenaz, because virtually
>> everyone in  Europe davened Ashkenaz originally until the advent of
>> Chassidus.  I am  not sure, but I doubt that he would approve of
>> someone who davens Ashkenaz  switching to Sefard.


R' Ben Simpleton:
I was told Rabbi Abadi permits anyone to pray Nusach Ashkenaz in a
Ashkenazi shul. Nusach Edot Mizrach in a Sephardi shul, Temani in
a Temani, etc. Never heard if he says it is permissible to enter a
hasidish shul.
---------------------


completely, IOW, changing from the Nusach his parent used to a different
one. R' Ben Simpleton seems to be talking about a visitor to a Shul which
davens a different Nusach than he's used to, that he should use the local
Nusach. R' MF says the same thing, except for the parts of Tefillah which
are said silently (presumably just Shemoneh Esrei), that one should use the
Nusach of the local Shul. 

I was once in the Vishnitz Beis Medrash in Monsey, and a non-Chassid was
being Baal Kriah in a Shacharis Minyan. He tried very hard, rather
unsuccessfully, to Lein with a Chassidish Havarah. I thought he was being
foolish, but then he told me that he was doing it because of R' Moshe's
Psak, and I realized that he was probably correct...

KT,
MYG

R' MB:
Where should tzedaqah go -- is it better to give to established
institutions, which have more skill at using the money, but you end up
paying for that skill, or to private individuals?

Perhaps it depends on which aspect of our relationship to HQBH we are
trying to emulate.

Emulating the Adon Olam would be working wholesale, and thus push more
toward supporting communal institutions.
Emulating Chai Goali would be having a personal stake in an individual,
and therefore push toward the matan beseiser in the mail-slot kind
of giving.

What do you think? A valid take-home lesson from Adon Olam? No?
----------------


as being instructive in this regard, that one should go with the mail-slot
drop. 
I see Adon Olam as beginning with Hashem's grandeur, only in order to come
to the "V'hu Ei-li V'chai Go'ali" part. Going back a step, the goal in life
is to be Shaleim, and the way to do that is to be Daveik in Hashem (Ayin
Mesillas Yesharim Perek 1). But in order to see the RBSO as the Chai Go'ali
and fulfill being Daveik in Hashem, one first has to see the RBSO as the
M'lo Kol Ha'aretz Kvodo, as the Rambam says in Yesodei HaTorah 2:2 in
relation to Ahavas Hashem. Only afterwards can he come to Ahavas Hashem,
which is, by definition, Dveikus B'Hashem.
So Adon Olam follows that structure. It starts off by focusing on the macro
and finishes on the micro - Hashem as Ruler of the universe, and Hashem as
Guardian on _my_ (not _one's_) soul. After Adon Olam, one should feel Ahavah
to Hashem. (And what better way of starting off Shacharis and the day than
that?)
So if our ultimate goal is to be Daveik B'Hashem, and the way we do that is
to love him, and the way we do that is to feel his closeness to us, that He
is the Chai Go'ali (being personally involved in our lives), then the way to
fulfill V'Halachta B'drachav with Tzedakkah is to personally be involved
with the Ani (pauper, not 'I'), just as Hashem is personally involved with
us. (See also Tomer Devorah 1:3.)

(ccing eVaad 1 and eVaad 2. BTW, there are openings now if anyone wants to
join one of the existing Ve'adim.)

KT,
MYG

Hankman wrote:

> I think some of the posts here are mixing two different concepts and 
> treating them as one. To  my understanding (I have no specific cite) Kri 
> and Ksiv are halacha leMoshe miSinai (at least in Chumash if not in 
> Nach). Whereas the subject matter in Megilla 25b, (Mishna and gemara) 
> refer not to Kri and Ksiv, but to Kriah and Targum, not the same as Kri 
> and Ksiv and likely of Chazal's origination based on the meaning at the 
> time as others have noted.

AIUI the "keri" that substitutes completely different words for
what is written is not HlMmS, but rather "tikum sofrim".

-- 
Zev Sero                      The trouble with socialism is that you
z...@sero.name                 eventually run out of other people?s money
                                                     - Margaret Thatcher

eating meat brings you closer to G-d

see

http://www.aish.com/tp/i/moha/99717284.html
by R Ari Kahn

-- 
Eli Turkel

R' Eli Turkel <elitur...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> ROY did not quote this KSA and I assume does not hold of it.
> Again he said that first priority is to daven in a shul. But if one is on
> a trip and it is not feasible then he allowed davening outdoors and did
> not mention anything about standing between trees.
>
> In my experience of traveling in EY it is common to see groups
> of religious Jews of all stripes davening mincha outdoors and I dont recall
> people looking for trees

Like [almost] everything in the KSA the source of the KSA is on SA OC
90:5: "One should not pray in an open area like a field since in a
private place the fear of The King is upon him and his heart is broken
and subdued."

The Pri Megodim and Chayei Odom (quoted in the MB) say that one should
try stand between some trees for the effect of some "enclosure".

The MB also says that it's implied that the Zohar says that  one
should Davka pray in a building.

I'm sure ROY is aware of these sources.

Obviously praying at the roadside is better than missing the time for
davening, but it doesn't make it the preferred method.

BTW: having lots of people do it does not prove anything; actually on
the way up to Jerusalem they have created a Mincha rest stop (at
Shoresh IIRC) - and up North I've seen various signs inviting people
to join for Mincha-before-sunset.

For that matter on Motzai Shabbos many people have "a Minyan in the
lobby" - against the explicit Halocho that one should (1) daven in
shul and (2) one should have a fixed place to always daven. (And
that's probably why the Halocho to say Veyiten LeCho got lost; there
are no Sidurim in the lobby. [SA OC 295:0 - Remo])

- Danny

I wonder if this is related to RAYK's position on the possibility of a democracy
having a din malkhus. (Given the rebbe-talmid relationship and all.)

From http://revach.net/article.php?id=4701

    Parshas Shoftim: Netziv - A King Is Not For Every Society

    "Ki Savo El HaAretz... V'Amarta Asima Alai Melech", when you come into
    Eretz Yisroel... and you will say place upon us a king. The Mitzva of
    making a king is one of the Taryag Mitzvos. Why does the Torah says
    "V'AMarta", when you will say that you want a king? Is it optional?

    The Netziv answers that each country and each society is different.
    Some countries cannot function without a strong leader, while other
    cultures cannot tolerate a king dictating the country's order and
    policies. The leadership of a country needs to match the society
    and having a type of leadership that is incompatible with the people
    can have consequences bordering of Sakanas Nefashos, says the Netziv.
    Such drastic matters cannot be forced upon them by a Mitzvas Aseh.

    Therefore says the Netziv, the Mitzva of coronating a King is a
    democratic decision. Only when the people are ready for it and ask
    for it, only then must the Sanhedrin anoint a king. This is seen
    in history as Bnei Yisroel did not have a king until after being in
    Eretz Yisroel for 300 years. Until then there was no consensus for
    it, says the Netziv.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

[This comes from an Areivim discussion. While mei'iqar hadin any skin from
a beheimah tehorah may be used for STa"M, someone raised the posssibility
of a chumerah arising of using only skins from an animal that is kosher
altogether -- shechutah, no mummim, etc... -- and thus of Ashkenazim
who insist on glatt kelaf for their Sta"M. This was actually suggested
facetiously, but it turns out there are real raglayim ledavar. At that
point the discussion veered into meqoros, and the Areivim mods pushed
the topic here. I felt a need to add this background to RDS's post.

-micha]

R' Zev Sero responded:
>This is of course true.  It's an open halacha in Shulchan Aruch and
>everyone knows it.  However it is a well-known (though not often
>practised, because of the expense) hiddur to use only the skins of
>actually kosher animals.

Since people requested a source for the above - and the mods didn't
allow this onto Areivim, so here it is on Avodah:

The Gemoro (Shabbos 108a) clearly allows STAM from Neveilos and
Treifos and nobody argues.

This is codified in SA OC 32:12.

The Be'er Heitev (16) brings 3 sources (abbreviated - and I can't
figure them out ambiguously) that it's preferable to use skins of
animals that are Kosher-to-be-eaten.

The Mishna Berura does not weigh in on the entire Se'if.

- Danny

On Fri, Aug 06, 2010 at 12:52:04PM +0300, Eli Turkel wrote:
: eating meat brings you closer to G-d
: see
: http://www.aish.com/tp/i/moha/99717284.html
: by R Ari Kahn

A more precise summary: Eating meat can be a tool to bring you
closer to G-d, as it is a shadow of qorbanos. Based on the
origin of chulin being at kenisas EY.

It depends if one refocuses desire, al pi the Alshich, through
our shemiras hilkho kashrus, oneg Shabbos and simchas YT.

BTW, after reading the article I'm not sure how R' Tzadoq justifies
eating meat in chu"l.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             "I think, therefore I am." - Renne Descartes
mi...@aishdas.org        "I am thought about, therefore I am -
http://www.aishdas.org   my existence depends upon the thought of a
Fax: (270) 514-1507      Supreme Being Who thinks me." - R' SR Hirsch

> [mailto:avodah-boun...@lists.aishdas.org] On Behalf Of Danny Schoemann
> Sent: Monday, August 09, 2010 1:59 PM
> 

> The Gemoro (Shabbos 108a) clearly allows STAM from Neveilos and
> Treifos and nobody argues.
> 
> This is codified in SA OC 32:12.
> 
> The Be'er Heitev (16) brings 3 sources (abbreviated - and I can't
> figure them out ambiguously) that it's preferable to use skins of
> animals that are Kosher-to-be-eaten.
> 

Rav Menachem Azaria AKA Rama MiPano (Fano?)
http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1138&;hilite=83937d16-cd14-4b8c-9262
-669eb24a974b&st=%D7%A0%D7%91%D7%9C%D7%94&pgnum=104,
 Shayarei knessess Hagedolah,
 Olas Tamid.

Akiva

On Thu, Aug 05, 2010 at 06:36:55PM -0400, T6...@aol.com wrote:
: I understood RMB to be saying, or at least implying, that he was thinking  
: about the general obligation to be "like Hashem" -- mah Hu rachum, af atah  
: rachum and so on.  This is not the same kind of "obligation" as the  
: requirement to eat a certain amount of matza at the seder.  By its nature  it is 
: hashkafic more than halachic, and one aspect of this issue is the question  of 
: what will, in fact, induce or motivate a Jew to be more "G-d-like"  or 
: "G-dly" in his daily behavior?

ALthough no less obligatory. The difference is, as the Ramban comments
on "ve'asisa hayashar vehatov", that there are obligations that aren't
amenable to simple codification or legal lay-out. What "vehalkhat
biderakhav" means in practice depends on the individual's abilities,
proclivities and circumstances.

:> Since when do 'fuzzy warm' feelings have any weight in  Yiddishkeit?

: Since Hashem gave us a Torah that is chock full of poetry comparing the
: relationship between Hashem and Klal Yisrael to the warm and loving
: relationship between a chassan and his kallah, or between a father
: and his children.

Still, this doesn't mean that we hold of glurge.

(I like Barbara Michelson of Snope.com's definition of "glurge":
    What is glurge? Think of it as chicken soup with several cups of sugar
    mixed in: It's supposed to be a method of delivering a remedy for
    what ails you by adding sweetening to make the cure more appealing,
    but the result is more often a sickly-sweet concoction that induces
    hyperglycemic fits.

    In ordinary language, glurge is the sending of inspirational (and
    supposedly "true") tales, ones that often conceal much darker meanings
    than the uplifting moral lessons they purport to offer or undermine
    their messages by fabricating and distorting historical fact in the
    guise of offering a "true story.")

RSRH discusses the metaphor of poetry, of nevu'ah, and as is well known,
the central role he gives symbology in explaining the mitzvos. Leshitaso
(as per the introductory essay in CW vol III), the power of the symbol
is that it's where intellect and emotion meet. Through a good symbol one
can get emotionally involved in what would otherwise be an abstrat idea.
But it also allows analogy and further analysis, giving a more detailed
understanding of something only superficially glimpsed on an emotional
level.

What I'm trying to say is that while we believe in utilizing the emotional
level (otherwise, why would HQBH have created it?), that doesn't mean
pursuit of the "warm fuzzies".

Such as the point at which I began... Contemplation of Adon Olam, what
the basic dialectic between immanence and trancendence says about derekh
Hashem is of value in and of itself. However, if one is hislameid from
it another level of understanding that enriches the qiyum hamitzvah of
tzedaqah, isn't that of value? Isn't the ability for Adon Olam to be both
Adon Olam and a call to share with others as He does with us better than
the usual morning slur through the word?) (Assuming I didn't arrive at shul
to late to say AO at all without sacrificing catching up to the minyan...)


Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             I always give much away,
mi...@aishdas.org        and so gather happiness instead of pleasure.
http://www.aishdas.org           -  Rachel Levin Varnhagen
Fax: (270) 514-1507


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 27, Issue 158
***************************************

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..."