Avodah Mailing List

Volume 28: Number 202

Sun, 09 Oct 2011

• 1. Re: national flag??? (Joel C. Salomon)
• 2. Talmudic Rabbis Expectations (Rich, Joel)
• 3. Tefilin on second day Yom Tov (Prof. Levine)
• 4. Malachim & mistakes (Prof. Levine)
• 5. Re: malachim & mistakes (David Riceman)
• 6. Why we eat on erev YK? (Liron Kopinsky)
• 7. Re: national flag??? (T6...@aol.com)
• 8. Re: losing 'nishba' status (kennethgmil...@juno.com)
• 9. Re: Malachim & mistakes (Zev Sero)
• 10. Some thoughts on a recent book "Knocking on Heaven's Door: How Physics and Scientific Thinking Illuminate the Universe and the Modern World" (Rich, Joel)
• 11. : Re: Brisker Chumeros and Shammuti Chumeros (Chana Luntz)
• 12. second day yom tov (Eli Turkel)
• 13. Yurt for a Sukkah (Shoshana L. Boublil)
• 14. Re: second day yom tov (Allan Engel)
• 15. Re: losing 'nishba' status (Daniel Eidensohn)

On 10/06/2011 09:53 PM, kennethgmil...@juno.com wrote:
> R' Zev Sero wrote:
>> So, a neis is a pole on which Moshe put the nechash nechoshes,
>> which combined make what certainly sounds like a standard of
>> the sort used by the Roman Army.
> 
> So: Am I to understand that a flag is a sheet of fabric containing a
> two-dimensional design or symbol of some sort, while a standard is a
> pole which supports a three-dimensional object which is serving as a
> symbol of some sort?

A flag is a sheet of fabric; a standard is a more general word.  The
nechash nechoshes was probably something like the later Roman Aquila
standard; see <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aquila_(Roman)>

--Chesky

http://www.thejewishweek.com/special_sections/text_context/shadow
_destruction

"The mechanics of compiling, editing and transmitting an oral text like the
Talmud are still in the process of being sorted out, but already one cannot
help but marvel at the optimism of the Talmudic rabbis who handed this
encyclopedic text to their students in the hope and expectation that the
next generation of rabbis would do the same"

============================================================
I've always wondered about this (forgetting about for now the trend at the
time to written works etc.),  did the Talmudic Rabbis prior to Rebbi have
an expectation that their talmidim would master the entire corpus of what
had been said prior to their time?  What about prior to Ravina ands Rav
Ashi?  or was there an expectation that only "major themes and opinions"
(TBD) would be preserved (e.g. do we think that every position of every
tanna on every subject was preserved?)

GCT
Joel Rich
THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE 
ADDRESSEE.  IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL 
INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE.  Dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 
strictly prohibited.  If you received this message in error, please notify us 
immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message.  
Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20111007/ec57177a/attachment-0001.htm>

At 11:02 AM 10/7/2011, R. Ari Kahn wrote:

>I am not paskening - but in the case where someone owns a an apartment Rav
>Shlomo Zalman Auerbach does advocate putting on Tefilin. If a person lives
>in the diaspora, and comes to Israel  for all 3 regalom RSZA says he should
>keep the second day as if he is an Israeli - even if he occasionally does
>not make it over - in which case he would hold 2 days in the Diaspora.
>I know of other similar cases where RSZA told people visiting to put on
>Tefilin. RSZA does use the Chacham Tzvi a "snif" -see Minchat Shlomo 1:16,
>Yom Tov Sheni Kihilchato page 195 note 8.
>If you do wish do know how I pasken, or want a review of the topic, you can
>listen to:
>http://www.yutorah.org
>/lectures/lecture.cfm/748708/Rabbi_Ari_Kahn/one_or_two_days_Yom_Tov_for
>_visitors_to_Israel

The person I am talking about almost always spends Pesach in the US, 
and, in recent years, has spent both Pesach, Succos, RH and YK in the 
US.  Given this, I really see no reason why he does not conduct 
himself as an American (which he and his wife are by birth)  who 
lives primarily in America.

I find it hard to believe that someone who owns an apartment in EY 
which he uses for a month or two a year, even if he spends all of the 
Yomim Tovim in EY,  is to conduct himself as an Israeli.  It seems to 
me that he is an American tourist who happens to have a fixed place 
to stay in EY whenever he goes to EY.

YL
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20111007/25137934/attachment-0001.htm>

At 11:02 AM 10/7/2011, R. Micha wrote:

>Too much of today's "hashkafah" books reduce Yahadus to self help. You
>can have the happiness you seek through Torah. The Torah will teach you
>how to be the parent you want to be, or be the person you want to be.
There is an attitude that one often hears today, "Everything is in 
the Torah."  When I hear someone say this, I ask, "Where do you find 
the Pythagorean Theorem in the Torah?"  This is always met with silence.

We are told that there is Chochma amongst the gentiles, but they do 
not have Torah.  If so, then Chochma, it seems to me, is not Torah 
and hence not in the Torah.  Therefore, it seems to me that 
everything is not to be found in the Torah.  YL
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20111007/69f5cbc5/attachment-0001.htm>

RHB:

<<people think that maybe their marriages don't work out because the 
malach" who either named them, or set up their zivug (didn't hear 
correctly)>>

See Igros haRambam ed. Sheilat pp.237-238.  This also appears in Tshuvos 
HaRambam ed. Blau #436.

David Riceman

Hope everyone had an easy fast.

At the seuda hamafseket, I was thinking about what it is that we are trying
to accomplish by eating on the 9th of Tishrei. I have heard many reasons
(granted a reason isn't necessary since it's a gezeirat hakatuv) as to why
we fast on the 10th: it gives us an opportunity to actually focus on what
the day is about without needing to run from this meal to the next, the inuy
helps us think about our sins, helps us think about other people who are
needy, eating a lot makes the fast easier/harder (I've heard both) etc.

But how does eating on the 9th serve "as if we fasted"?

Or maybe more to the point, what are we supposed to be thinking about as we
eat?

Kol Tuv,
Liron
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20111008/b1f73798/attachment-0001.htm>

 
From: "kennethgmil...@juno.com" _kennethgmiller@juno.com_ 
(mailto:kennethgmil...@juno.com) 
-1

R'  Zev Sero wrote:

> Flags were invented in the early 2nd millennium  CE.  They did
> not exist in Biblical times, or in Chazal's.  I  don't know when
> standards were invented; the medrash about the tribes'  standards
> may be historical for all I know, but it wouldn't shock me if  it
> weren't.

[snip]> It's probably something that serves the  same purpose for which
> flags were invented, but it can't mean a flag,  unless they're
> a technology that was lost and rediscovered.    Chazal seem to
> have thought it meant a standard, which was an invention  known
> in their day, but perhaps not in David's; I don't  know.




.....Anyway, I concede that on Bamidbar 21:8, Rashi says that a  "neis" is 
a "klonas" - a pole. But there's another common word for flag:  "degel". And 
Rashi on Bamidbar 2:2 seems to use "degel" in what seems to me like  a 
pretty good description of a flag (although it is a flag of one solid  color).

Akiva Miller

 
>>>>
In modern Hebrew the word "degel" means flag (I don't know how long  the 
word "degel" has been used to mean flag -- maybe RZS knows?)  But Rashi  seems 
to have understood the word "degel" to mean a division.  There were  12 
shevatim (well, 13 counting Levi) around the Mishkan but only four degalim --  
three shvatim to a degel, i.e., three to a division.
 
In Bamidbar 2:2 it says that each person camped "ish al diglo be'osos  
leveis avosam" which according to Rashi seems to mean each person in his  
division, with "signs" for his father's house [trbe].  And what Rashi says  there 
is that each degel had its own os -- and then he goes on to explain  that 
the osos were colored cloths, a different color for each tribe.   He says that 
each person can recognize his own degel by its os -- IOW that he  can find 
his way home to his division, his area, by looking up at the  flag.  
 
Whether Rashi was being anachronistic by assuming that they had flags in  
the desert I don't know but as RAM mentioned, the technology involved in  
creating a flag and putting it on a pole (Rashi doesn't mention poles, but 
where  else would a flag be?) doesn't seem so advanced that they couldn't have 
had  flags in the desert.  And if RZS doesn't think they had flags, then  
what /were/ the "osos"?
 

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




_____________________  







-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20111007/15cd532c/attachment-0001.htm>

R' Micha Berger wrote:

> I don't understand the mi'ut of today's poseqim ... chamur posiiton,
> ... Which means that any valid reason why the person isn't fully
> accountable for his decision ought to be a halachic factor. Even
> if they aren't closely similar to a TsN.

I don't understand the machmir position either. My only guess is that those
poskim simply cannot understand how a person who can be exposed to Torah
and still reject it. Their emunah is so strong that they think it should be
simple and easy for others to accept as well. For example:

> And the Minchas Elazar says that the only Qaraim the Mabit
> declared TsN were ones who didn't live among Rabbinic Jews.

I presume this means that the Karaites who did live among Rabbinic Jews are
therefore written off as apostates? I just can't fathom that. If the two
traditions lived amongst each other, wouldn't it be natural for most people
to believe that which their parents taught them? Why would the Minchas
Elazar and/or Mabit consider the isolated pockets of Karaites to be TsN,
but those who happened to live in the same city as Rabbinics were damned as
kofrim? I don't get it.

But please! Let no one think this post to be critical of the machmir
poskim. I am in no position to question their ability to pasken, and I'm
certainly not saying that they are wrong.

All I'm saying is that their views and opinions are shaped (at least
partially) by their environment -- just as mine are. For a great deal of my
life, I was aware of Jews who kept Shabbos and would not eat non-kosher
food even away from home, but I had no reason to believe that this was
demanded of ALL Jews, rather than merely those who opted for that
lifestyle, so it isn't surprising that I have a more inclusive approach to
"Who is a TsN?" Similarly, it should be no less surprising that those who
understood the Ol Mitzvos from their very earliest years, would have no
trouble excluding the lazy bums who reject Torah even after some slight
exposure to the concept.

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
57-Year-Old Mom Looks 25
Mom Reveals $5 Wrinkle Trick That Has Angered Doctors!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4e8f36ccbe07588366cst05vuc

On 7/10/2011 12:11 PM, Prof. Levine wrote:
> There is an attitude that one often hears today, "Everything is in the
> Torah."  When I hear someone say this, I ask, "Where do you find the
> Pythagorean Theorem in the Torah?"  This is always met with silence.
>
> We are told that there is Chochma amongst the gentiles, but they do
> not have Torah.  If so, then Chochma, it seems to me, is not Torah and
> hence not in the Torah.  Therefore, it seems to me that everything is
> not to be found in the Torah.  YL

"Istakel be'oraisa uvera alma".  Therefore everything in the world must
be in the Torah.

-- 
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

                    
                

I sent the email below to the author after seeing her interviewed on TV
(see second review here: http://torahmusings.com/2011/10/audio-roundup-5/comment-page-1/#c
omment-42399 . Am interested in any discussion, other than about my run
on sentences (be nice-it's still not yet hoshana rabbah :-))
GT
Joel Rich
=====================
Dear Dr. Randall:
I finished part one of Knocking on Heaven's Door, which I believe has the material on religion that you referenced.
I wanted to put a few thoughts on paper, perhaps inarticulately, to give
you some sense of my reaction. I would enjoy the opportunity to discuss it
with you because I think the topic lends itself more to interactive
discussion rather than to correspondence but fully understand that you are
a very busy person (especially with the neutrino "thing" :-)) and do
appreciate the fact that you even took the time to respond to my original
e-mail so I don't have an expectation of a response.
On page 56, you discussed external (e.g. God) influences that would have to
be transmitted by a mechanism. I am curious whether you are a determinist,
which to me means, do you believe that when science fully understands the
chemistry and biology of the brain that one would be able to tell for each
individual exactly what they will do at every particular time? If that
turns out to be the case, then I think we are in agreement that religion
and science would be in conflict as religion certainly believes in an
individual having free will.
As to your original thoughts on the logical contradiction (bottom page 57),
I am sure that there are many religious sects that do believe that science
and religion are at odds and "choose" religion. For example, within
Orthodoxy (Jewish) [where I inhabit some subsection], there are those that
believe it is heresy to believe that the world is anything other than 5,772
years old (tomorrow actually) or that the world was created in 7 literal
days (notwithstanding the fact that the sun wasn't created on the first day
in the bible).
However, there are those rationalists who believe that science and religion
do not conflict (and I use the word rationalist with a sort of grin because
I imagine you are thinking to yourself how can you be rational and
religious and I agree that even the most rational religious person must
take some leap of faith rather than just leave things as an open question
[e.g. where did the big bang come from?]). However, as I understand it, our
goal is to reduce that leap of faith to the extent possible. Maimonides is
famous for saying that he believes in creation ex-nihilo but should science
prove that this was not the case, he would reinterpret scripture to be
consistent with the scientific evidence (i.e., there is only one truth and
reason and revelation will converge to it).
I guess the real question that you raise is who's in charge? I don't see
why one would necessarily believe that there must be a contradiction here.
Why couldn't the creator of the universe create the universe in such a way
that the scientific rules you study are the rules the creator embedded in
the universe.
I'd also point out that Rabbi J.B. Soloveitchik understood Genesis 1:28
("and subdue it") as a religious requirement to harness the forces of
nature for the betterment of all mankind.
Obviously, there's a lot to say, but I fear my earlier flatlander remarks may apply here.
A closing thought:
Hamlet Act I, Scene 5
And therefore as a stranger give it welcome.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.


But in our case I'm guessing:
I'll tell ya about the magic
It'll free your soul
but it's like trying to tell a stranger 'bout rock n roll.


Keep up the good work!
Regards,
Joel Rich


THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE 
ADDRESSEE.  IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL 
INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE.  Dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 
strictly prohibited.  If you received this message in error, please notify us 
immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message.  
Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20111009/9095e01f/attachment-0001.htm>

RMB wrote:

>After Mussaf, our toqeia blew a number of variants of the qolos. This had
me thinking. ... Here by shofar there is also another factor... The whole
>reason for teru'ah vs shevarim vs shevarim-teru'ah was originally to be
yotzei all the shitos. Thus making my question about "hakesil bechoshekh 
> holeikh" not just on modern chumeros, but it is now a question about why
the gemara thought it was proper to say do all the sounds, even though each 
> shitah makes the other two superfluous, and unless your mesorah was
shevarim-teru'ah, a hefseq after the berakhah (over laasiyasan)?


And RYK added :

> I think that one should distinguish the practice of blowing the shofar
> after davening is over and other chumrot. Most agree that this is  beyond
> even a chumra and is more like a hanhaga tovah, which shows our love of
the
> mitzvah of Shofar.
> 
> If these different sounds were introduced into the regular Rosh
> HaShanah prayer service it would be on a different level.

Problem I am having with all of this is the explicit Rema in Orech Chaim
siman 596 si'if 1 "there are places which have the custom to return and to
blow thirty blasts ... and after one has been yotze with this *shuv ain
l'tokeia od bechinam* [but a katan even if he has reached chinuch it is
permitted to tell him to blow, and it is permitted for him all the day]."
And as you can see from the Magen Avraham, the statement shuv ain l'tokeia
od bechinam is because of a shvus d'rabbanan.  And while yes, the Taz does
appear to allow blowing after one is definitely yotzei (he does not
understand the shvus as applying on a regular yom tov that is not shabbas)-
so they have on whom to rely, it seems really very odd to me that people
should be doing things "beyond even a chumra" or to be "yozeh all the
rejected shitos" when by doing so one would seem to be over on a d'rabbanan
according to what seems to be if anything the majority opinion.  Ie if there
is a real genuine safek, then OK, that is not *bechinam* (although by
allowing the extra 30 but no more, the Rema seems to be ruling this out),
but if one acknowledges that there is no real genuine safek, then these
blowings would seem by definition to be perilously close to tokeia bechinam,
meaning one is being makil in a d'rabbanan.  What am I missing here?

Regards

Chana

<<Once again, we do *not* keep YTSh because it is minhag avoteinu.  We
keep it because the Sanhedrin told us "hachaziku minhag avoteichem
biydeichem".  So your question doesn't start.  The same chachamim who
told us to treat chicken as fleishig told us to continue our old
practices regarding YT.  Whatever it was we did when there was a real
safek, we should keep doing that. >>

This the poisition of the chacham tzvi that travelers betwwen Y and chutz
la-aretz do what they would do in the old days. Hower, the SA doesnt pasken
that way and says that some from chutz who comes to EY for a visit keeps two
days even though in the days of the bet hamikdash he would have kept 1 day


-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20111008/70ca1750/attachment-0001.htm>

A friend is going to be taking a course during Sukkot. The dwellings there
are a dome and a yurt (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yurt).

They asked if they could use the yurt for a Sukkah, and if not - what would
they have to do to make it kosher?

Shoshana L. Boublil

That's not in the SA (although it is in a tshva of RYKaro)

On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 7:48 PM, Eli Turkel <elitur...@gmail.com> wrote:
 Hower, the SA doesnt pasken
> that way and says that some from chutz who comes to EY for a visit keeps two
> days even though in the days of the bet hamikdash he would have kept 1 day

On 10/7/2011 1:27 PM, kennethgmil...@juno.com wrote:
> R' Micha Berger wrote:
>
>> I don't understand the mi'ut of today's poseqim ... chamur posiiton,
>> ... Which means that any valid reason why the person isn't fully
>> accountable for his decision ought to be a halachic factor. Even
>> if they aren't closely similar to a TsN.

*Igros Moshe*[1]***(Even HaEzer 1:82):*I mean even more. That even 
concerning the children that the Rambam writes (Hilchos Mamrim 3:3) 
"however the children of those who erred and their descendants who have 
been misled by their fathers and were born amongst the Karaites who 
raised them according to their mistaken understanding they are like 
tinok shenishba (captive children). They have been raised not to be 
concerned about keeping mitzvos and it is like they are forced against 
their will." Thus we see that these descendants do not have the status 
of being lowered into the pit and not being raised out -- nonetheless 
they are also invalid witnesses. While it is true that they are not less 
valid than non-Jew, nevertheless they are not more valid than non-Jews 
either in regards to be a witness. That is because they are not 
considered as Jews in regard to being a witness... Thereforejust as 
non-Jews are invalid witnesses so are these children of heretics. Even 
though in regards to not rescuing them from a pit it is logical that 
they are superior to non-Jews. That isfor the reason stated in the 
Rambam that they are to be encouraged to repent with pleasant words 
until they return to the Torah -- a reason which is not relevant for 
non-Jews. Nevertheless as long as they haven't repented and remain in 
their mistaken ways they are not superior in general to non-Jews since 
we see that heretics are considered to have left the Jewish people since 
they are not observing the Jewish religion. Therefore as long as they 
continue their mistaken understanding and behavior they are not included 
in the Jewish people. The only exception is that they are superior in 
regards to the issue of saving them because there is no obligation to 
get non-Jews to observe more mitzvos but there is such an obligation for 
the children of heretics. Therefore even if you consider them to be 
tinok shenishba amongst the non-Jews because of the heresy which has 
become widespread in the world -- G-d save us -- and they are just being 
influenced by their environment- nevertheless they are invalid witnesses 
because they are not betterthan non-Jews. In fact, however it is 
reasonable to say that these children of heretics are not considered in 
the category of tinok shenishba amongst the non-Jews since they live in 
places where religiously observant Jews are found and also because their 
ancestors believed in G-d and His Torah and they were influenced to 
follow in the mistaken ways of their parents. In fact they had the 
option of following in the influence of the religiously observant and 
their ancestors and a son is moreinfluenced by his ancestors. If so they 
are in effect freely choosing the bad path and they through their evil 
thoughts are caught up in evil and they have misled themselves. And I 
sawin the Rambam(Hilchos Mamrim 3:3) that he writes, "And what is our 
case that the person is considered a full heretic and should be killed? 
It is a person who follows after his lightheaded thoughts and after the 
desires of his heart and denies the Oral Torah just as Tzadok and Baysos 
did first and similarly all those who mistakenly followed after them." 
Thus we see that even those who mistakenly followed after Tzadok and 
Baysos even though they themselves were not heretics. However after they 
were captured by the words of Tzadok and Baysos and followed after them 
and did not follow after the good observant Jews - they are considered 
asthose who initiated heresy. The reason is simple because they also saw 
righteous and observant people and they were able to follow after them 
and nevertheless they went after the wicked and therefore they are 
considered as having deliberately sinned. Thus is it with our present 
case. These people also see righteous and observant people and they are 
able to follow after them. Nevertheless they are caught to go after the 
wicked and are thus intentional sinners and are like those who initially 
denied the Torah and therefore they are included amongst those who 
should be lowered into a pit and not rescued and are therefore worse 
than non-Jews and they are invalid as witnesses as I have explained.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20111009/2bbe9ac9/attachment.htm>

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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 28, Issue 202
***************************************

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..."