Avodah Mailing List

Volume 28: Number 116

Wed, 29 Jun 2011

• 1. Re: The Rambam and Eliyahu haNavi (Micha Berger)
• 2. Ten Tribes (was Yovel) (Prof. Levine)
• 3. Re: Consumer Alert: Minhog Scams On The Rise! (Zev Sero)
• 4. Re: Rakia, Maaseh Bereishis, Halachah (Lisa Liel)
• 5. Re: Consumer Alert: Minhog Scams On The Rise! (Micha Berger)
• 6. Re: Rakia, Maaseh Bereishis, Halachah (Micha Berger)
• 7. Rakia, Maaseh Bereishis, Halachah (Lampel)
• 8. Re: Rakia, Maaseh Bereishis, Halachah (Micha Berger)
• 9. Re: Consumer Alert: Minhog Scams On The Rise! (Zev Sero)
• 10. Re: Consumer Alert: Minhog Scams On The Rise! (Micha Berger)
• 11. Re: Consumer Alert: Minhog Scams On The Rise! (Lisa Liel)
• 12. Re: Rakia, Maaseh Bereishis, Halachah (Poppers, Michael)
• 13. kulanu zadikim?? (Harvey Benton)
• 14. Re: Consumer Alert: Minhog Scams On The Rise! (Zev Sero)
• 15. Re: Consumer Alert: Minhog Scams On The Rise! (T6...@aol.com)
• 16. Re: yovel (T6...@aol.com)
• 17. Re: kulanu zadikim?? (Liron Kopinsky)
• 18. Re: Ten Tribes (was Yovel) (Eli Turkel)

On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 05:52:52AM +0300, Ben Waxman wrote:
>> - so far out he didn't need to list it,
>> - so mesoretic it's not speculation, or
>> - the list simply isn't an attempt to be complete?

> Regarding the last two, are there other examples in the Rambam?

Regarding the 1st, I don't think it's possible. A gemara isn't too far
out to discuss. If the Rambam wanted to dismiss it, wouldn't he have had
to explicitly do so?

But to get to RBW's question...

> Regarding "so mesoretic..." what falls into that category? Mosiach ben
> David isn't so mesoretic therefore the Rambam felt the need to list it
> but Mosiach ben Yosef is?

The Rambam distinguished between things chazal knew by tradition from
revelation and things that the deduced on their own. Saying that such
deductions about yemos mashiach are just guesses, and we won't know
until it happens. If he thought the arrival of Mashiach ben David was
revealed rather than deduced, it wouldn't be on his list of things that
they deduced on their own.

> Regarding "the list isn't an attempt to be complete": doesn't that go  
> against the Rambam's raison d'etre for the Mishne Torah?

Except that it fits the Rambam's wording, that he was giving a rule
followed by a list of *examples*. "Vekhein kol kayotze ba'eilu hadevarim
be'inyan hamashiach meshalim heim... Ameru chakhamim... Veyeish min
hachakhamim..." And at the end of the list, "Vekhol eilu havevarim
VEKHAYOTZEI BAHEM..."

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             "I hear, then I forget; I see, then I remember;
mi...@aishdas.org        I do, then I understand." - Confucius
http://www.aishdas.org   "Hearing doesn't compare to seeing." - Mechilta
Fax: (270) 514-1507      "We will do and we will listen." - Israelites

At 03:53 PM 6/28/2011, R Eli Turkel wrote:

>Why would one assume that there are any remnants left of the 10 tribes
>to bring back?
>By now they are intermarried over many centuries.

There was a time when some believed that the American Indian was 
descended from the Ten Tribes.  See

<http://personal.stevens.edu/%7Ellevine/american_indian_ten_tribes_v3.p
df>Is<http://personal.stevens.edu/%7Ellevine/american_indian_ten_tribes_v3.p
df> 
the American Indian Descended From the Ten Lost Tribes?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110628/eb99bae7/attachment-0001.htm>

On 28/06/2011 3:49 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 01:37:44PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
>>> Arguable. But the peteq would have had to fall during the early bayis
>>> sheini period -- galus Bavel or galus Yavan.
>
>> There was a beis hamikdash, where open miracles were seen every day.
>
> So it's not about galus, it's about the absense of a beis hamiqdash?

That's what galus *is*.


> In any case, which daily miracles happened in bayis sheini?

Presumably the ones listed in Pirkei Avos.


> If there were a neis during bayis sheini that lo ira qeri lekohein gadol
> bayom yakippurim, why did they did they need to keep him up all night?

Ein somchin al hanes.



>> Open miracles are not non-existent during galus, they're just rare.
>> Tzadikim are not personally in galus...
>
> I didn't think people were in galus. I thought galus was a state the
> Shechinah was in, which results in historical effects like the diaspora.

On the contrary, galus is what happens to us.  That the Shechina also
goes into galus is "`imo anochi batzarah".  "Galu levavel, Shechina
`imahem", not vice versa.

-- 
Zev Sero        If they use these guns against us once, at that moment
z...@sero.name   the Oslo Accord will be annulled and the IDF will
                 return to all the places that have been given to them.
                                            - Yitzchak Rabin

                    
                

At 01:55 PM 6/28/2011, Micha Berger wrote:
>Numerous sattelites are in geostationary orbit; meaning, they orbit
>the earth such that they are always over the same point. What if a
>given sattelite is always over my home?
>
>Reshus hayachid olah ad laraqia (Shabbos 52b, Eiruvin 7a).
>
>So, whether or not that sattelite is on my reshus would depend on whether
>ad laraqia is the top of the clouds, or ad infinitum. (Unless the universe
>is finite, in which case...)

Well, first there's a question of whether it's ad v'ad bichlal or ad 
v'lo ad bichlal.  And then there's the nafka mina question.  Zeh 
neheneh v'zeh lo chaser.  How are you affected by a satellite being 
in your reshut even if it is?

Lisa 

On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 03:57:00PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
>>> There was a beis hamikdash, where open miracles were seen every day.

>> So it's not about galus, it's about the absense of a beis hamiqdash?

> That's what galus *is*.

As I already said, 2 of the four galiuos (Bavel & Yavan) were entirely
during bayis sheini. So, I cannot see how the lack of BHMQ defines
galus.

>> In any case, which daily miracles happened in bayis sheini?

> Presumably the ones listed in Pirkei Avos.

I think that's only bayis rishon. Thus the common girsa is "10 nissim
na'asu la'avoseinu beVHMQ".

OTOH, I did find examples of nissim during bayis sheini: the ner maaravi
stayed lit until the death of R' Yishmael Kohein Gadol; 40 years before
the churban the tolaas shani stopped turning white on Yom Kippur.

>> If there were a neis during bayis sheini that lo ira qeri lekohein gadol
>> bayom yakippurim, why did they did they need to keep him up all night?

> Ein somchin al hanes.

So people didn't go up to Yerushalayim because their wouldn't be any
room? Pregnant women stayed away because of piquach nefesh? The continual
nissim were there so that they could relied upon!

>>> Open miracles are not non-existent during galus, they're just rare.
>>> Tzadikim are not personally in galus...

>> I didn't think people were in galus. I thought galus was a state the
>> Shechinah was in, which results in historical effects like the diaspora.

> On the contrary, galus is what happens to us.  That the Shechina also
> goes into galus is "`imo anochi batzarah".  "Galu levavel, Shechina
> `imahem", not vice versa.

Golah and galus aren't the same thing. Again, see bayis sheini.

We're drifting from the original topic without resolving it... 

There are miracle stories of R' Chanina ben Dosa and R' Pinchas b Yair,
and numerous others of Chazal. You're now positing that such people
aren't in galus, and therefore assuming those midrashim refer to nisim
is as rational as assuming the story is mashal. Do I understand correctly?

(Personally, I think wondering about the historicity of these stories is
simply off topic...)

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             I long to accomplish a great and noble task,
mi...@aishdas.org        but it is my chief duty to accomplish small
http://www.aishdas.org   tasks as if they were great and noble.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                              - Helen Keller

On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 02:03:54PM -0500, Lisa Liel wrote:
> Well, first there's a question of whether it's ad v'ad bichlal or ad  
> v'lo ad bichlal.  And then there's the nafka mina question.  Zeh neheneh 
> v'zeh lo chaser.  How are you affected by a satellite being in your 
> reshut even if it is?

Salvage rights?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

> On 6/28/2011 3:53 PM,From: Micha Berger<mi...@aishdas.org>
>
> ...Reshus hayachid olah ad laraqia (Shabbos 52b, Eiruvin 7a).
>
> So, whether or not that sattelite is on my reshus would depend on whether
> ad laraqia is the top of the clouds, or ad infinitum. (Unless the universe
> is finite, in which case...)
>
The Rambam also says that the Torah uses the words rakia (cloud region) 
and shamayim (celestial region) interchangeably, using each one for the 
other. So, another nafka meena: if your reshus would be directly under a 
star, would you own it?

On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 04:45:43PM -0400, Lampel wrote:
> The Rambam also says that the Torah uses the words rakia (cloud region)  
> and shamayim (celestial region) interchangeably, using each one for the  
> other. So, another nafka meena: if your reshus would be directly under a  
> star, would you own it?

No star is stationary over one point on the earth.
<http://www.fourmilab.ch/yoursky>

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

On 28/06/2011 5:04 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 03:57:00PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:

>>>> There was a beis hamikdash, where open miracles were seen every day.

>>> So it's not about galus, it's about the absense of a beis hamiqdash?

>> That's what galus *is*.

> As I already said, 2 of the four galiuos (Bavel&  Yavan) were entirely
> during bayis sheini.

Huh?  Bavel was between the two Batim.  Yavan occupied the BHMK and
turned it into a pagan temple.


>>> If there were a neis during bayis sheini that lo ira qeri lekohein gadol
>>> bayom yakippurim, why did they did they need to keep him up all night?
>
>> Ein somchin al hanes.
>
> So people didn't go up to Yerushalayim because their wouldn't be any
> room? Pregnant women stayed away because of piquach nefesh? The continual
> nissim were there so that they could relied upon!

That's not relying on a nes.  Even without a nes there was no reason
not to go *up*; the nes was that nobody found it too crowded once they
got there, and decided to go camp outside the city.  And pregnant women
routinely go everywhere even today; they don't avoid leaving home for
fear that an emergency will suddenly happen!  And yes, occasionally
emergencies do happen, and babies are lost; the nes was that this never
happened in the BHMK.  Etc.  One can't rely on a ness, but that doesn't
mean they don't happen.  



>>>> Open miracles are not non-existent during galus, they're just rare.
>>>> Tzadikim are not personally in galus...
>
>>> I didn't think people were in galus. I thought galus was a state the
>>> Shechinah was in, which results in historical effects like the diaspora.
>
>> On the contrary, galus is what happens to us.  That the Shechina also
>> goes into galus is "`imo anochi batzarah".  "Galu levavel, Shechina
>> `imahem", not vice versa.
>
> Golah and galus aren't the same thing. Again, see bayis sheini.

Golah means the people who are outside EY.  But what's that got to do
with it?  The whole concept of "galus hashchina" comes from "galu
levavel shchina imahem".



> There are miracle stories of R' Chanina ben Dosa and R' Pinchas b Yair,
> and numerous others of Chazal. You're now positing that such people
> aren't in galus, and therefore assuming those midrashim refer to nisim
> is as rational as assuming the story is mashal. Do I understand correctly?

It has never occurred to me that there exist frum Jews who don't believe
that the story of R Chanina ben Dosa happened.

-- 
Zev Sero        If they use these guns against us once, at that moment
z...@sero.name   the Oslo Accord will be annulled and the IDF will
                 return to all the places that have been given to them.
                                            - Yitzchak Rabin

                    
                

On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 05:15:05PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
>                                         Yavan occupied the BHMK and
> turned it into a pagan temple.

For a couple of decades out of the entire galus. Alexander took over
from Paras uMadai, and Yavan was in charge until a century or so before
the churban.

...
>> Golah and galus aren't the same thing. Again, see bayis sheini.

> Golah means the people who are outside EY.  But what's that got to do
> with it?  The whole concept of "galus hashchina" comes from "galu
> levavel shchina imahem".

Galus is a metaphysical state of separation, golah is a physical one.
Galus requires ge'ulah, a spiritual redemption. Golah ends with qibush
haaretz.

...
>> There are miracle stories of R' Chanina ben Dosa and R' Pinchas b Yair,
>> and numerous others of Chazal. You're now positing that such people
>> aren't in galus, and therefore assuming those midrashim refer to nisim
>> is as rational as assuming the story is mashal. Do I understand correctly?

> It has never occurred to me that there exist frum Jews who don't believe
> that the story of R Chanina ben Dosa happened.

The Rambam outright ridiculed those who do. The Maharsha clearly states
that the more extreme stories are ahistorical, as does the Maharal. Pick
up a copy of RDE's sefer, Daas Torah -- he collects the sources for
you. IIRC, he reprinted the translations of them here a while back.

Me, I don't believe we're supposed to care. We are being anachronistic
when we talk about Chazal's stories and the science of history. They
repeated stories for their messages; the notion of having a precise
record of the past wasn't valued yet. I think Chazal simply didn't care,
and the whole question is a distraction from the stories' points.

(Similar to my opinion on studying the gemara via the revadim
approach. I'm not saying the gemara wasn't written in layers; just that
spending your time watching the layers is a distraction from what gemara
is supposed to be about.)

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Live as if you were living already for the
mi...@aishdas.org        second time and as if you had acted the first
http://www.aishdas.org   time as wrongly as you are about to act now!
Fax: (270) 514-1507            - Victor Frankl, Man's search for Meaning

At 04:15 PM 6/28/2011, Zev Sero wrote:
>On 28/06/2011 5:04 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
>>On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 03:57:00PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
>
>>>>>There was a beis hamikdash, where open miracles were seen every day.
>
>>>>So it's not about galus, it's about the absense of a beis hamiqdash?
>
>>>That's what galus *is*.
>
>>As I already said, 2 of the four galiuos (Bavel&  Yavan) were entirely
>>during bayis sheini.
>
>Huh?  Bavel was between the two Batim.  Yavan occupied the BHMK and
>turned it into a pagan temple.

I believe he meant Paras and Yavan.  You can't say that the 34 years 
of Paras "bifnei habayit" weren't bifnei habayit.  And the mikdash 
was there during Galut Yavan, which lasted beyond the cleansing by 
the Chashmonaim.

>>There are miracle stories of R' Chanina ben Dosa and R' Pinchas b Yair,
>>and numerous others of Chazal. You're now positing that such people
>>aren't in galus, and therefore assuming those midrashim refer to nisim
>>is as rational as assuming the story is mashal. Do I understand correctly?
>
>It has never occurred to me that there exist frum Jews who don't believe
>that the story of R Chanina ben Dosa happened.

You live and you learn.

Lisa 

In Avodah V28n115, R'Micha wrote:
> Bereishis Rabba 4:2 speak of the raqia' congealing from a drop of
water. Based on this, the Rambam (Moreh 2:30) and Ralbag say that
raqia' is the atmosphere. Ibn Ezra reaches the same masqanah, but
via a different route. Mayim asher mei'al laraqia comes in cumulus,
stratus, nimbus, and so on.
> Learning Eruvin, the thought hit me that this may have a nafqa minah
lehalakhah.
> Numerous sattelites are in geostationary orbit; meaning, they orbit the earth such that they are always over the same point. What if a
given sattelite is always over my home?
> Reshus hayachid olah ad laraqia (Shabbos 52b, Eiruvin 7a).
> So, whether or not that sattelite is on my reshus would depend on
> whether ad laraqia is the top of the clouds, or ad infinitum. (Unless
> the universe is finite, in which case...) <
Wouldn't clarifying that BT statement as "ad v'lo ad bichlal" render moot "What if a given satellite is always over my home?"?

All the best from 
-- Michael Poppers via BB pager

if we are all tzadikim, then home come all of us do not get to go into olam 
haba??
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110628/b215a0f0/attachment-0001.htm>

On 28/06/2011 5:46 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 05:15:05PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
>>                                          Yavan occupied the BHMK and
>> turned it into a pagan temple.

> For a couple of decades out of the entire galus. Alexander took over
> from Paras uMadai, and Yavan was in charge until a century or so before
> the churban.

Since when is Galus Yavan more than the short time they occupied the
BHMK?  And since when does Galus Madai extend beyond the building of
Bayis Sheni?

>>> Golah and galus aren't the same thing. Again, see bayis sheini.

>> Golah means the people who are outside EY.  But what's that got to do
>> with it?  The whole concept of "galus hashchina" comes from "galu
>> levavel shchina imahem".

> Galus is a metaphysical state of separation, golah is a physical one.
> Galus requires ge'ulah, a spiritual redemption. Golah ends with qibush
> haaretz.

And Galus is something that happens to *us*, and Hashem goes with us
out of sympathy, to make us feel better and to show how important we
are to Him.  It's not as if something can "happen" to Him ch"v.

>>> There are miracle stories of R' Chanina ben Dosa and R' Pinchas b Yair,
>>> and numerous others of Chazal. You're now positing that such people
>>> aren't in galus, and therefore assuming those midrashim refer to nisim
>>> is as rational as assuming the story is mashal. Do I understand correctly?

>> It has never occurred to me that there exist frum Jews who don't believe
>> that the story of R Chanina ben Dosa happened.

> The Rambam outright ridiculed those who do.

Where?

> The Maharsha clearly states
> that the more extreme stories are ahistorical, as does the Maharal.

Huh?  What extreme stories?  How are R Chanina ben Dosa's stories in any
way extreme?  Where do either the Maharsha or the Maharal cast any
doubt whatsoever on them?

> Me, I don't believe we're supposed to care. We are being anachronistic
> when we talk about Chazal's stories and the science of history. They
> repeated stories for their messages; the notion of having a precise
> record of the past wasn't valued yet. I think Chazal simply didn't care,
> and the whole question is a distraction from the stories' points.

On the contrary, the lesson *depends* on the story being literally
true.  If he didn't really made vinegar burn, then what's the point?
If R Pinchas ben Yair's donkey didn't really turn down tevel, then
what's the point?  The gemara certainly treats that story as literally
true, bringing proofs from it all the time.



On 28/06/2011 5:42 PM, Lisa Liel wrote:
> I believe he meant Paras and Yavan.  You can't say that the 34 years of
> Paras "bifnei habayit" weren't bifnei habayit.

They weren't galus.

> And the mikdash was there during Galut Yavan, which lasted beyond the
> cleansing by the Chashmonaim.

Since when?  Who told you such a thing?

-- 
Zev Sero        If they use these guns against us once, at that moment
z...@sero.name   the Oslo Accord will be annulled and the IDF will
                 return to all the places that have been given to them.
                                            - Yitzchak Rabin

 

From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
ii

>> I  didn't think people were in galus. I thought galus was a state the
Shechinah  was in, which results in historical effects like the diaspora.<<

--  
Micha  Berger              







>>>>
 
It's the other way around. People are in galus -- Am Yisrael is in galus -- 
 and the Shechinah is in galus with us, in sympathy with us you might say, 
"imo  Anochi vetzarah."  
 
"Veshavti es shvus Yakov."
 
 
 
--Toby  Katz
================




_____________________
 
 



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110628/f750bbaa/attachment-0001.htm>

 
From: Eli Turkel  <elitur...@gmail.com>


<<Doesn't that require each tribe  living in its own territory?  That
certainly won't happen until Moshiach  comes.>>

Why would one assume that there are any remnants left of  the 10 tribes
to bring back?
By now they are intermarried over many  centuries.


-- 
Eli Turkel





>>>>>
 
 
At least a few individuals from each shevet lived in the southern kingdom  
(the kingdom of Yehuda) at the time of churban bayis rishon, and became  
assimilated into the dominant, largest shevet -- Yehuda.  For example,  
Mordechai is identified as both a member of the tribe of Binyamin (ish Yemini)  as 
well as a Yehudi -- which by then referred to all Jews, including  Leviim.   
 
I agree that it is highly unlikely that pockets of the Ten Tribes are still 
 living somewhere -- I am quite certain the Sambatyon is not a real river 
-- but  at the same time, it is likely that Eliyahu Hanavi will be able to 
point to  specific Yehudim and say, "You are really from the tribe of 
Ephraim...or  Shimon....or Naftali....ben achar ben."  
 
The tribes that will be reconstructed this way will be very small and  
probably there will be a new division of the land, not the one that existed  
during the bayis rishon, to reflect the fact that Yehuda is and will be by far  
the largest shevet.  And also to reflect the fact that the eastern border  
of E'Y will be the Euphrates.
 
--Toby Katz
================






_____________________ 




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110628/0e79d9ee/attachment-0001.htm>

On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 5:44 PM, Harvey Benton <harvw...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> if we are all tzadikim, then home come all of us do not get to go into olam
> haba??
>

I think you're understanding it backward.
"Kol yisrael yesh lahem chelek laolam haba, shenemar, "v'amech kulam
tzaddikim..."."

Kol Tuv,
Liron
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110628/748e6e04/attachment-0001.htm>

Even if true why would they be Jewish anymore?.
>
> There was a time when some believed that the American Indian was descended
> from the Ten Tribes.? See
>
> Is the American Indian Descended From the Ten Lost Tribes?
>



-- 
Eli Turkel


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 28, Issue 116
***************************************

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..."