Avodah Mailing List

Volume 28: Number 188

Tue, 20 Sep 2011

• 1. Re: Messilat Yesharim and Peer Pressure (Micha Berger)
• 2. Re: maarit ayin at birchas levana... (Micha Berger)
• 3. Re: kol yisrael yesh..... (beis/lamed) (Micha Berger)
• 4. Re: our understanding(s) of fire......change in halacha?? (Micha Berger)
• 5. Will The Kosher Switch Bring Mashiach? (Prof. Levine)
• 6. Re: our understanding(s) of fire......change in halacha?? (Yosef Skolnick)
• 7. Re: Sim shalom-Shalom Rav (D&E-H Bannett)
• 8. Re: Sim shalom-Shalom Rav (Micha Berger)
• 9. Nar NaAr (Meir Rabi)
• 10. Humanoids, Who Cares? What Difference Does it Make? Probably not Talmud Torah. (Meir Rabi)
• 11. avraham v. yakov?? (attitudes? job descriptions??) (Harvey Benton)
• 12. shaliach?? (ownership??)//nafkamina (Harvey Benton)
• 13. Re: Humanoids, Who Cares? What Difference Does it Make? Probably not Talmud Torah. (Lisa Liel)
• 14. Re: Nar NaAr (Micha Berger)

On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 08:37:49PM +0300, Liron Kopinsky wrote:
:  When describing the things that get in the way of proper Zehirut, Ramchal
: names 3 reasons: Being too busy, not taking life seriously, and having bad
: friends....

: Having bad friends is interesting, however, as its opposite - having good
: friends - is not mentioned as one of the positive ways of acquiring Zehirut.
: This is strange because in Pirkei Avot (Chapter 2) it says "[Eizohi
: derekh yesharah sheyidbaq bah ha'adem?]" - "What is the straight path
: that a person should stick to?" - and one of the answers given there is
: "[chaver tov]" - "a good friend." In the mishna this is contrasted with
: the question "What is the bad path that a person should distance himself
: from?" with one of the answers being "bad friends."

Actually, R' Yehoshua speaks belashon yachid in both halves of 2:9,
IOW that last quote should be "a bad friend".

Which is actually ambiguous. An "ayin tovah" and a "leiv tov" are middos,
not posessions. Perhaps "chaver tov" means "*be* a good friend"?

: Why did Ramchal leave out positive peer pressure?

1- Balebateshe answer: The Ramchal knew that only yechidei segulah would
try to follow his book. Therefore, he couldn't recommend someone finding
chaveirim tovim to help him develop zehirus -- the advice would be too
rarely applicable. Friends who pull the other way might be easier to
stumble across.

2- Mussaresque answer: Developing middos through the aegis of friends
contains a mikhshol. One could end up putting up a front of zehirus to
fit in with the crowd, or worse, for yuhara, and not actually develop
real zehirus. Perhaps this motivated the Ramchal not to recommend finding
such friends, even though he tells you to avoid their opposite.

(And he also recommends you have friends and to be a good friend. leaving
you without too many options other than chaveirim tovim. Maybe settling
for people who are basically at the same level as you?)

See the discussion at the last part of pereq 11, on neqi'us WRT kavod. The
Ramchal discusses relative kavod, and things people will do not to seem
less deserving than their friends.

I actually think the first answer, prosaic as it is, is still the more
likely reason for the Ramchal's ommission.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             "As long as the candle is still burning,
mi...@aishdas.org        it is still possible to accomplish and to
http://www.aishdas.org   mend."
Fax: (270) 514-1507          - Anonymous shoemaker to R' Yisrael Salanter

On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 12:58:26PM -0700, Harvey Benton wrote:
: why would we care (or not care) that people driving (walking by)
: at time of birchas levana
: might think we are worshipping, (or blessing the moon) as it may be???

Isn't this mar'is ayin in general -- an issur to lead others to believe
you're sinning?

If others are misled as to what you're doing but thereby think you're
not sinning, they might imitate you. Chazal refer to that as chosheshin
and often cause for gezeiros. Very different than mar'is ayin.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Despair is the worst of ailments. No worries
mi...@aishdas.org        are justified except: "Why am I so worried?"
http://www.aishdas.org                         - Rav Yisrael Salanter
Fax: (270) 514-1507

On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 06:54:43PM -0400, Poppers, Michael wrote:
: In Avodah V28n185, RHB asked:
:> kol yis rael yesh lahem chelek l'olam haba??
:> why not "b" olam haba?
:> {similar question to lech l'shalom vs. lech B' shalom??}

: And then there's "kal-Yisrael areivim zeh bazeh," also known as
: "...lazeh," as well as "hayom <#days/weeks> baOmer" vs. "...laOmer."

: At first thought, the "b" prefix seems to indicate being part and
: parcel/in the midst of while the "l" prefix seems to indicate some
: degree of separation from/seeing the entity with perspective...

Is a day of the omer a unit, and the omer period as a whole a collection;
or is the omer the unit, and the day a part? We say "the United States
is..." but in the antebellum South they said "... the Confederate States
are..." A state would be counted "be-US" but "le-CS".

I don't see how this reasoning would apply beyond countables. If you
can't point to units, how can you ask whether one has a collection of
units or parts of a whole?

The Ritva (on Berakhos 64a) explains that "lekh beshalom" implies that 
the shalom is limited to the halikhah, not the destination. Which is
appropriate for a meis, who is headed for peace no mater what, and it's
only the road that is in question.

About areivim, this is what I wrote last May:
> Areivim zeh bazeh means that all Jews are mixed up one within the other.
> The Ohr haChaim invokes it to explain why cheit ha'eigel would impact
> the quality of MRAH's nevu'ah.

> Areivim zeh bazeh is a blander statement of mutual hischayvus, without
> any metaphysical basis posited for it.

And in any case, it's not "ba'areivus", the preposition isn't on the
parallel thing.

Last, as for le'olam habah:

Are we saying they have a cheileq of olam haba? According to the Ran
and the Iqarim, the "only" difference between gehenom and gan eden is
the state of the soul when it enters olam haba. One will burn in shame,
the other will enjoy the ziv hashechinah. If genehom is also part of
olam haba, what kind of promise is "yeish lahem cheileq be'olam haba"?

So I think the mishnah means "yeish lahem cheileq [in the sechar of
being Yisrael, applicable] toward olam haba." And thus their gehenom is
limited. (Until you read further in pereq Cheileq and see the cheileq
only applies to Jews who didn't forfeit their title "Yisrael".)

But if one referred to the sekhar explicitly it would be "cheileq
besechar", not "lesechar".

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger                 Life is complex.
mi...@aishdas.org                Decisions are complex.
http://www.aishdas.org               The Torah is complex.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                                - R' Binyamin Hecht

On 09/15/2011 06:04 PM, Harvey Benton wrote:
: our understanding of fire (and its' associated electricity cousin) in
: the minds of the poskim, are not the
: same as they were at the turn of the century when they decided that 
: electricity was assur on shabbas...

The question is how much the halakhah is dependent on science. Often
halakhah depends on how we naturally see the world rather than how the
world is. A subcategory of this is that sometimes we define things based
on function rather than ontology.

It could be that the change in science is irrelevent. If we had any
consistent understanding of what the original pesaqim were based on, I
might be able to be less vague.

On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 07:57:49PM -0400, Joel C. Salomon wrote:
: Consider:  A flame, a glowing coal, and red-hot metal are all considered
: "fire".[1] ...

The red-hot metal may well be bishul.

The question could be how we understand the machloqes about gacheles
shel mateches. PERHAPS the Raavad won't call it havarah (labeling
it bishul or makeh bepatish instead) because he holds that it's not
burning unless something is being consumed. Maybe he holds that "aish"
is incandescence that consumes something. Or maybe not -- that would
contradict "haseneh bo'eir ba'eish, vehaseneh eineni ukal". It wouldn't be
"eish", technically, would it?

:             Is there anything in the way of equating this with
: "incandescence"?  Is there anything else halachikly defined as "aish"
: that does not fit this, aside from the Chazon Ish's view that all
: (most?) electric current qualifies?

AFAIK, the CI invokes boneh, not havarah.

And in any case, this doesn't revolve around whether electricity is eish,
but whether a filament that glows because of elevericity is.

We happen to have a great essay on the subject by RMJBroyde and RHJachter
at <http://www.aishdas.org/articles/rmjb_electricity1.pdf>

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             We are what we repeatedly do.
mi...@aishdas.org        Thus excellence is not an event,
http://www.aishdas.org   but a habit.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                   - Aristotle

Please see http://tinyurl.com/6h6nt82

Despite the positive write up at http://www.kosherlightswitch.com/, 
not everyone
agrees that this switch is indeed kosher!  See the above URL for details.

YL

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110919/a5fd42ac/attachment-0001.htm>

There are 2 separate questions here:

1) How do we view halacha with regards to changes in understandings of the
metzius or principles involved, once "rules" have been established?  Is
there any difference how long ago the rules were established? Do the
different types of sevaros have different "rules" as to when they may
change?
2) How that would apply to electricity?  A good article that gives a truly
excellent summary of the issues involved can be found here:
http://www.daat.ac.il/daat/english/journal/broyde_1.htm

Yosef Skolnick
516-690-SKOL
https://sites.google.com/site/yskolnick/




On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 6:04 PM, Harvey Benton <harvw...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> our understanding of fire (and its' associated electricity cousin) in the
> minds of the poskim, are not the
> same as they were at the turn of the century when they decided that
> electricity was assur on shabbas. now our understanding has changed, and
> for instance we know that
> not all fires (eg underwater flares) are the same;
> is there a nafka mina in that in the times of the gemarra if a tanna or
> amora passed a halacha (and the
> reason(s) changed, we do not change the halacha (eg snakes in am water),
>
> mecz
>
> _______________________________________________
> Avodah mailing list
> Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
> http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110919/1d3eed40/attachment-0001.htm>

Re Nuschaot from the geniza and RMB' comment << AFAIK none 
of them give context about where they were said.>>

It's true that the source from the geniza from which I 
quoted the sim shlom'kha nusach does not say where it was 
said.  It is considered to be from Eretz Yisrael because it 
is the complete sh'moneh esrei and has other signs of E"Y 
nusach.

In addition to BA"H oseh ha-shalom (that is sometimes found 
in Bavel and therefore isn't 100% proof of E"Y) it also has 
the two Bavel b'rakhot "matzmiach keren yeshu'a" and "boneh 
Yerushalayim" combined in a single b'rakha and other "known" 
E"Y nuschaot. Somewhere in the archives (Avodah or Mesorah) 
there should be my posting about the Talmud Yerushalmi on 
the combined b'rakhot and how the 17 became 18 when 
lameshumadim (now known as lamalshinim) was added.


kvh"t,

David 

On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 11:14:11PM +0300, D&E-H Bannett wrote:
> It's true that the source from the geniza from which I quoted the sim 
> shlom'kha nusach does not say where it was said.  It is considered to be 
> from Eretz Yisrael because it is the complete sh'moneh esrei and has 
> other signs of E"Y nusach.

> In addition to BA"H oseh ha-shalom (that is sometimes found in Bavel and 
> therefore isn't 100% proof of E"Y) it also has the two Bavel b'rakhot 
> "matzmiach keren yeshu'a" and "boneh Yerushalayim" combined in a single 
> b'rakha and other "known" E"Y nuschaot....

My point wasn't that this fragment didn't qualify as a likely nusach EY
candidate. I was arguing that it isn't uniquely qualified. It's guesswork
to know which of the version*s* that have 18 berakhos were used in EY,
and it's quite possible the Shalom Rav version and the Sim Shelomekha
version (both combine berakhos 14 and 15) were used in different parts
of EY or at different times.

For that matter, the geniza has /four/ different vesions of Shomeia'
Tefillah (all with that chasimah). For Machon Shilo to pick among
them -- and again, they pick the shortest of the four -- requires some
element that is less than certain.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Strength does not come from winning. Your
mi...@aishdas.org        struggles develop your strength When you go
http://www.aishdas.org   through hardship and decide not to surrender,
Fax: (270) 514-1507      that is strength.        - Arnold Schwarzenegger

The qorei who leins "vehinei nar bokheh"?
Ever hear "vehinei nayr bokheh"?

But this is a common problem when the vowel is moved, and one suspects this
happens because we are not familiar with the Schwa, eg El-Azar becomes
Ela-Zar, there was no such person in the family.
Vo-A-As Aron Atzei Shittim becomes Vo-As; perhaps this is also driven by our
reluctance to say As, it sounds rather indelicate. Which is like the
re-adjustment of Gd making his abode in these lower regions - which sounds
perfectly acceptable when one hears Gd made His Dira in the Tachtoinim,
however when said in the modern Hebrew dialect with the M Hebrew
pronunciation to a M Hebrew speaking audience - it sounds
perfectly preposterous.


-- 

Best,

Meir G. Rabi
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110920/905b0038/attachment-0001.htm>

The new book Echoes of Eden by Rabbi Ari Kahn .... that Adam Harishon
co-existed with non-human humanoids. This says Rabbi  Moshe Eisemann, is the
position of the  Ramban.

Who Cares?
What Difference Does it Make?
Angels dancing on the head of a pin.
Must I accept/believe these positions?

Why does anyone bother with these types of inquiries?
Is it Talmud Torah? and I dont accept that the Ramban's including it (if he
did indeed include it) as a comment proves that it is TT.

Best,

Meir G. Rabi
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110920/3140dc31/attachment-0001.htm>

from:?http://www.on1foot.org/sourcesheet/passover-slavery-freedom-and-migra
tion
is there a difference in the attitudes (and why??) of yaakov going down to get food (only to go down)
but not necessarily to stay there,?
versus avraham, where it says lagur sham.......
??????? ????? ???????? ???????? ??????? ????????????

?????? ???? ???? ????? ??????? ????????:


INTRODUCTION
And Jacob said?(Genesis 42:2),
Translation
Original
There are rations to be had in Egypt. Go down and procure rations for us
there, that we may live and not die." [JPS translation ????? ??????
???????????? ????? ??????? ?????????? ????? ??????? ????????? ????? ??????: 
For as long as people have lived, they have migrated in search of food and work.
?
________________________________

In Genesis 12:10 we read,?
Translation
Original
There was a famine in the land, and Abram went down to Egypt to sojourn there, for the famine was severe in the land. [JPS translation] 
?
mecz
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110919/511b3b09/attachment-0001.htm>

f someone sends a message or payment (eg reuven to shimon) via a shaliach,
and then retracts, and asks for the message or money back, is the shaliach
allowed to retract it? (eg, or once it reaches the shaliach's hand, does it
becomes the "property of shimon?? and it cannot be retracted (???) without
his/(shimon's) permisssion?? thanks, hb

nafkamina moshe rabeinu and the luchos/torah???
once given, who did it belong to??
?
mecz
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110919/1442b5a0/attachment-0001.htm>

Actually, with all due respect, Rabbi, it makes an enormous difference.  
Perhaps not to you or to me, but there are many Jews (and their number 
is growing) who are troubled by a cultural imperative to accept the 
principle of evolution on the one hand, and the fact that the Torah 
seems to describe something very different on the other.

I don't believe that we can just dismiss such dilemmas as irrelevant, 
because they are (a) preventing Jews from being chozer b'teshuva and (b) 
causing Jews to go off the derekh.

On a personal level, no, it doesn't have to make any difference to you.  
But scorning the question seems a bit less compassionate than one would 
hope.

Lisa

On 9/20/2011 2:48 AM, Meir Rabi wrote:
> The new book Echoes of Eden by Rabbi Ari Kahn .... that Adam Harishon 
> co-existed with non-human humanoids. This says Rabbi  Moshe Eisemann, 
> is the position of the  Ramban.
>
> Who Cares?
> What Difference Does it Make?
> Angels dancing on the head of a pin.
> Must I accept/believe these positions?
>
> Why does anyone bother with these types of inquiries?
> Is it Talmud Torah? and I dont accept that the Ramban's including it 
> (if he did indeed include it) as a comment proves that it is TT.
>
> Best,
>
> Meir G. Rabi
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Avodah mailing list
> Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
> http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
>    
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110920/030a73a7/attachment-0001.htm>

On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 06:02:34PM +1000, Meir Rabi wrote:
:> The qorei who leins "vehinei nar bokheh"?
:> Ever hear "vehinei nayr bokheh"?

: But this is a common problem when the vowel is moved, and one suspects this
: happens because we are not familiar with the Schwa, eg El-Azar becomes
: Ela-Zar, there was no such person in the family.

To reiterate the context:

We were exploring the question of whether Ashkenaz once had a sound
to the ayin. I suggested, based on "Yankev", that it made a kind of
/ng/ sound. Which REMT bolstered by noting that the /n/ in "Yankev"
being an ayin is lehalakhah -- in hilkhos gitin, a "Yankev" is written
"Ya'akov", and not listed as a separate qinui.

S, of "On the Main Line" (who owes us an introduction), contrasted
the slurring of ayin of "mayriv" or "tayna" with the total dropping
of the alef in "bal" (for "ba'al"). He continued by suggesting that
this indicates a yud-ish sound to the ayin, and "Yankef" is simply
because "Yaykev" doesn't flow well when you try to articulate it.

So the question isn't the droppage, but whether ayins and alefs get
dropped in consistently different ways.

I therefore pointed out that "vehinei nar bokheh" indicates that they
don't.

Personally, I think the rounding of the patach with a /y/ is part
of East European language patterns. Much the way EE Ashkenazim will
turn melekh into meilekh, pesach into peisach, etc... And while it may
be more likely among ayins, which were once voiced, do not reflect *how*
ayins sounded.

RMR, I don't see how your comments distinguish between "nar" and "bal"
on one hand or the (imaginary) "nayr" or "mayseh" on the other.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Strength does not come from winning. Your
mi...@aishdas.org        struggles develop your strength When you go
http://www.aishdas.org   through hardship and decide not to surrender,
Fax: (270) 514-1507      that is strength.        - Arnold Schwarzenegger


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 28, Issue 188
***************************************

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..."