Avodah Mailing List

Volume 30: Number 12

Tue, 03 Apr 2012

• 1. Re: Eliyahu beHar haCarmel (Saul Guberman)
• 2. vihi noam last week (Prof. Levine)
• 3. Re: vihi noam last week (Saul Guberman)
• 4. Re: ret: costa concordia - and Specialization (Micha Berger)
• 5. Re: ret: costa concordia - and Specialization (Zev Sero)
• 6. Re: ret: costa concordia - and Specialization (Micha Berger)
• 7. Re: Chief Rabbi Metzger: Women can lead Seder (kennethgmiller@juno.com)
• 8. Leading Charedi Posek Says metzitza' Should Not (Joseph C. Kaplan)
• 9. hilchot Pesach (Eli Turkel)
• 10. Re: Chief Rabbi Metzger: Women can lead Seder (Micha Berger)
• 11. Re: hilchot pesach (Micha Berger)
• 12. Re: ret: costa concordia - and Specialization (Zev Sero)
• 13. Re: hilchot Pesach (Zev Sero)
• 14. two fictional sects (David Riceman)
• 15. Re: hilchot Pesach (Danny Schoemann)
• 16. torah and mada conference (Eli Turkel)
• 17. The Shul, the Caterer, and the Kiddush Signs (Prof. Levine)

On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 13:24, Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org> wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 01:10:41PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
> >> Ein [habamah] niteres ela benavi." I'm I wrong, or is RYBC saying that
> >> the permissability of a navi making a bamah is mutar in principle,
> >> even if only one navi invoked it?
>
> > "Niters benavi" *is* "hora'as sha'ah".  That's what "hora'as shaah"
> > *means*.
>
> The pasuq isn't about pesaqim in general nor about hora'ah. The pasuq in
> Devarim is a statement speicifically about bamos. And its heter appears
> to be based on the fact that Eliyahu was told to build a bamah on Har
> HaKarmel, it wasn't a place he picked himself, and thus not within the
> terms of the issur.
>
> Tir'u baTov!
> -Micha
>


IIRC the medrash claims that Eliyahu was not commanded to build the bamah &
it was one of the many acts that he did of his own accord that seems to
"force" God's hand.  In the end that is why Eliyahu had to be "taken away"
and Elisha put in his place.

The Navi says that God told him to meet with Achav.  No details about what
should happen at the meeting are given.  It does not say have a "public
meeting" with all the Baal prophets.

Saul
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120402/fdecabe8/attachment-0001.htm>

At 04:11 PM 4/2/2012, Saul Guberman wrote:

>The Ezras Torah Luach, which is as close to a minhag America as there is,
>says to not say it.

Well,  the Jewish Press luach said that one should say it!  YL


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120402/4415b2f7/attachment-0001.htm>

On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 16:48, Prof. Levine <llev...@stevens.edu> wrote:

>  At 04:11 PM 4/2/2012, Saul Guberman wrote:
>
> The Ezras Torah Luach, which is as close to a minhag America as there is,
> says to not say it.
>
>
> Well,  the Jewish Press luach said that one should say it!  YL
>
>
> My bad.  ETL, you SHOULD SAY it.

Saul
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120402/2b85e6f5/attachment-0001.htm>

On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 12:10:35AM -0400, David Wacholder wrote:
:    1. Sabbath Desecration for Pikuach Nefesh classically applies only to
:    the endangered Yisrael, not to the non-Jewish populace...

A word quibble... Calling it "desecration" presumes dechuyah, not huterah.

See Yuma 84b-85b. R Shimon ben Menasyah holds that "'veshameru Venei
Yisrael es haShabbbos' -- ... chalal alav Shabbos achas kedei sheyishmar
shabasos harbei." Admittedly this is the 6th of 7 proposed sources. The
last is Shemuel, who says the source is "vechai bahem" (which isn't
Shabbos specific), and then Rava agrees and procedes The Ohr haChaim on
RBbM's pasuq holds that this derashah is the maqor. Which would imply
holding like RSbM about only saving shomerei Shabbos.

The Tzitz Eliezer (9:17) says that tinoqos shenishbe'u are also to
be saved. R SZ Aurbach remains unsure whether it is muttar midinei
Shabbos to save a TSN on Shabbos.

So, it's not that saving a Yisrael is inherently dokheh Shabbos. It is
future Shabbasos that are dochim.

Except...

There are still the issues of mishum eiva and mipenei darkhei Shalom.

Mishum eivah is not a bedi'eved, a pragmatic way to survive. BM 12a
applies it between father and child; Yuma 12b, to the kohein gadol;
Kesuvos 58b, between husband and wife.

In The Human and Social Factor in Halakhah" ch 8, R' Aharon Lichtenstein
explains that the pursuit of shalom and avoidance of eivah is not
pragmatic, but part of the general rule of imitatio dei. E.g. He quotes
how the Rama used Achitofel's argument from sotah that he could erase
sheim Hashem for the sake of Shalom, and "leshanos mipenei hashalom",
as proofs that the pursuite of shalom is itself a deOraisa that could
outrank others.

So, saving mechalelei Shabbos befarhesia bemeizid and nakhriim is
permitted mishum eivah and mipenei darkhei shalom -- which makes them
no less pemitted, just pemitted for reasons extrinsic to Shabbos.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Man can aspire to spiritual-moral greatness
mi...@aishdas.org        which is seldom fully achieved and easily lost
http://www.aishdas.org   again. Fulfillment lies not in a final goal,
Fax: (270) 514-1507      but in an eternal striving for perfection. -RSRH

On 2/04/2012 5:48 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> There are still the issues of mishum eiva and mipenei darkhei Shalom.
>
> Mishum eivah is not a bedi'eved, a pragmatic way to survive. BM 12a
> applies it between father and child; Yuma 12b, to the kohein gadol;
> Kesuvos 58b, between husband and wife.
>
> In The Human and Social Factor in Halakhah" ch 8, R' Aharon Lichtenstein
> explains that the pursuit of shalom and avoidance of eivah is not
> pragmatic, but part of the general rule of imitatio dei. E.g. He quotes
> how the Rama used Achitofel's argument from sotah that he could erase
> sheim Hashem for the sake of Shalom, and "leshanos mipenei hashalom",
> as proofs that the pursuite of shalom is itself a deOraisa that could
> outrank others.

Then why was it not permitted before the 19th century?

-- 
Zev Sero        "Natural resources are not finite in any meaningful
z...@sero.name    economic sense, mind-boggling though this assertion
                  may be. The stocks of them are not fixed but rather
                 are expanding through human ingenuity."
                                            - Julian Simon

On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 05:51:13PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
> Then why was it not permitted before the 19th century?

As is clear from Chazal's uses of both idioms, the notion that it means
"do it to save future lives" doesn't fit. So regardless of how you like
my answer to your question or not, this understanding is muchrakh.
See also the Yad -- Melakhim 10:12, Avadim 9:8. The Rambam Teh 145:9
"Tov H' lakol" as the source for mipenei darkhei shalom. Kind of
open-n-shut, no?

But to answer the question as per previous iterations: The pursuit of
shalom is a primary value. That is a constant. The application of the
value to the real world changes as the world does. Producing shalom
wasn't an potential goal until Emancipation.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

R' Harry Maryles wrote:

> I don't understand the Chidush. Even though it is a Mitzvas Aseh
> SheHaZ'man Gramma -- Sippur Yitzias Mitzraim is a Chiuv D'Oraisa
> for women too Al Pi the Chinuch (Mitzvah 21). Why shouldn't they
> read the Haggadah?

You arecorrect. The question was not about Hilchos Pesach, but about Hilchos Tzniyus. I went back to the article that was linked to, and I found this:

> Metzger added that even if the husband is at home on the night of
> the Seder, the family should rotate reading sections of the
> Haggadah and the wives and daughters should read as well. He says
> that it is forbidden that the women only hear the Haggadah, they
> must also be part of telling the story of the Exodus from Egypt.
>
> ?People think that in deference to modesty, they should forbid
> women from reading aloud. Many religious people do not know it,
> but there is actually a law [against this],? Metzger told Israel
> Hayom on Saturday night.

Akiva Miller


____________________________________________________________
53 Year Old Mom Looks 33
The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4f7a189b94a122c5e97dst01vuc

> h
> ttp://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/General+News/123257/Clarification-F
> rom-HaRav-Shmuel-Kamenetsky-Regarding-Metzitzah-B%27Peh.html

> It appears that RSK was misrepresented.

It's certainly not clear to me from the article whether RSK was 
"misrepresented" or whether he "misspoke" and is now saying what he wishes 
he had said originally.  I don't think it's possible to know which is 
correct without having a complete transcript of the original conversation he 
had with the reporter.

Joseph Kaplan

<< As I've said before, I don't think this is a problem at all, just as I
don't think there's a problem with eating in the queue at the supermarket,
since there is a very strong umdena that the owner doesn't mind. But I
also don't see the problem with adding an explicit stipulation to the
contract, which would surely resolve any safek. >>

Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchato doesnt seem to agree (he gives a case of the
Goy giving a present).
R. Avraham Yosef said explicitly at the shiur that one has to pay the Goy
or get his explicit Merchilla

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120403/83cb7290/attachment-0001.htm>

On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 09:21:00PM +0000, kennethgmil...@juno.com wrote:
: You arecorrect. The question was not about Hilchos Pesach, but about
: Hilchos Tzniyus...

:> "People think that in deference to modesty, they should forbid
:> women from reading aloud. Many religious people do not know it,
:> but there is actually a law [against this]," Metzger told Israel
:> Hayom on Saturday night.

So, does RYM expect women to make zimun with men around to? If not,
vos iz der chiluq (VIDC)?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             A cheerful disposition is an inestimable treasure.
mi...@aishdas.org        It preserves health, promotes convalescence,
http://www.aishdas.org   and helps us cope with adversity.
Fax: (270) 514-1507         - R' SR Hirsch, "From the Wisdom of Mishlei"

On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 10:49:28PM +0300, Eli Turkel wrote:
: 4. Someone who eats matzah on erev Pesach is compared to "bo-el arusah
: be-vet chamiv".  This rather stranger comparison is based on the permission
: to be with ones wife only after 7 berachot. On seder night there are 7
: berachot before eating matzah (works only according to thise that dont say
: a beracha on the second cip of wine - otherwise there are 8).

In the aggadic portion of his Shabbos haGadol derashah, my LOR (R' Chaim
Davis) made a Shabbas haGadol - Aufruf comparison.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

On 2/04/2012 6:35 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 05:51:13PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
>> Then why was it not permitted before the 19th century?
>
> As is clear from Chazal's uses of both idioms, the notion that it means
> "do it to save future lives" doesn't fit. So regardless of how you like
> my answer to your question or not, this understanding is muchrakh.


> See also the Yad -- Melakhim 10:12

"Darkei shalom"; what has that got to do with "mishum eivah"?


>, Avadim 9:8.

Doesn't even mention "darkei shalom" (presumably because we need no shalom
with slaves).  All it talks about is developing midas harachmanus, and
eschewing midas ha'achzarius.


> The Rambam Teh 145:9  "Tov H' lakol" as the source for mipenei darkhei
> shalom. Kind of open-n-shut, no?

Again, what has this got to do with healing them on Shabbos, which
the very same Rambam *expressly forbids*?

  
> But to answer the question as per previous iterations: The pursuit of
> shalom is a primary value. That is a constant. The application of the
> value to the real world changes as the world does. Producing shalom
> wasn't an potential goal until Emancipation.

And where do you find that "darkei shalom" justifies chilul shabbos?


-- 
Zev Sero        "Natural resources are not finite in any meaningful
z...@sero.name    economic sense, mind-boggling though this assertion
                  may be. The stocks of them are not fixed but rather
                 are expanding through human ingenuity."
                                            - Julian Simon

On 2/04/2012 5:31 PM, Eli Turkel wrote:
> << As I've said before, I don't think this is a problem at all, just as I
> don't think there's a problem with eating in the queue at the supermarket,
> since there is a very strong umdena that the owner doesn't mind. But I
> also don't see the problem with adding an explicit stipulation to the
> contract, which would surely resolve any safek. >>
>
> Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchato doesnt seem to agree (he gives a case of the Goy giving a present).

Argument from authority?!  Tell me one reason why it should be a problem.


> R. Avraham Yosef said explicitly at the shiur that one has to pay the Goy or get his explicit Merchilla

When does he say to pay him?  On Shabbos?!  Or before Shabbos, while
it's still Pesach?!  Of course not.  You're *going* to pay him after
Shabbos, when you buy it back from him, *just as you would if you hadn't*
*taken it on Shabbos*.   This is obvious.

-- 
Zev Sero        "Natural resources are not finite in any meaningful
z...@sero.name    economic sense, mind-boggling though this assertion
                  may be. The stocks of them are not fixed but rather
                 are expanding through human ingenuity."
                                            - Julian Simon

I'm idly planning out a novel about two fictional sects of Jews living 
in the Appalachians.  I'm curious if anyone can come up with evidence 
that either of these sects grossly misunderstand Hazal.

Sect number one argues as follows:

The Americas, because they intersect a westward line drawn from Israel, 
are considered iyei hayam and hence part of EY according to R. Yehudah, 
whose opinion they follow.  Furthermore, they argue that when the Mishna 
says about bamos "v'lo haysah lahem od hechsher", it means up to the 
time that that Mishna was composed.  But afterwards, when there was no 
unitary source of hora'ah, that din no longer applied, and so bamos are 
mutar in the Western hemisphere.  Furthermore, they argue that the issur 
of being makriv korban Pesah on a bamah applies only to a bamas yahid, 
and since theirs is the only valid bamah in the world, it is the bamas 
tzibbur.

It follows that they sacrifice korban Pesah every year.

Sect number two argues as follows:

The authority of the kehillah comes either top down, from a grant of 
authority from the king, or bottom up, from a grant of authority from 
its inhabitants.  The authority of previous generations to bind later 
generations is mediated by the kehillah: if someone moves to a town with 
a different custom he is not bound by his old town's customs, and, a 
fortiori, if he establishes a new town he is not bound unless he agrees 
to be bound.

They establish a new town where only dinim d'orayysa apply, arguing that 
the whole authority of derabbanans disappear without consent.  
Furthermore, since they don't consent to be bound by a local kehillah, 
and certainly the US government does not grant them any authority, they 
argue that all the dinim associated with "b'nei ha'ir kofin ..." do not 
apply to them, even though they are arguably d'orayysa.  They 
acknowledge that Jews have an obligation to have a court enforcing 
criminal law, but argue that that obligation is fulfilled by the secular 
court system.

So we have a highly organized and hierarchical sect meeting a wildly 
anarchistic sect, both claiming to be authentic representations of 
Judaism, and each acknowledging that the other also has a plausible case 
to be made for it.  And then there's a mysterious murder ...

I know it's implausible, but are there blatant halachic holes?

David Riceman

Me, yesterday:
> He mentioned that there would be a problem with Muktza, since Bein
> haShmoshos the Chametz is forbidden.

R' Eli Turkel
> I did some more research.
> Shmirat Shabbat Kehilchato explicitly allows eating chametz on the shabbat
> immediately following Pesach based on a Rav Akiva Eger. He has an extensive
> footnote asking why it is different from ornaments after Succot. Among
> other answers he brings one from CI. Hence, this seems to be universally
> held that "Migo De-ikzai" doesnt hold from yomtov to shabbat. All this only if
> he gets a present from a Goy.

I asked R' D. A. Morgenstern shlita this morning what he really said.

He said:

There's on opinion in Tosafos that something fit for a poor person but not for a rich one is Muktza for the rich person.

However, the MB paskens that since the Chometz belonged to a Goy during Bien haShmashoth, it is not Muktza; the only issue would be stealing from the Goy.

I stand corrected.

- Danny

Yesterday was the latest annual torah u mada conference.
A short summary of some talks

began with a joke
Husband asks what he can do to help the wife for Pesach
Wife says that the best is to leave the house
The husband returns after 2 houirs and the wife asks why he returned so soon
The husband answers that it is as much as he can do to help for 2 hours

Moral: A Torah conference right before Pesach can be a help for the wife
(ps there were a fair amount of women attending)

-----------------------------
Moshe Koppel spoke about his work on finding authors of books - was tested
first on known works
1. They separated randomly Yermiyahu and Yechezkel and were able to
reconstruct the original with 90-100% accuracy (except for Yechezkel 42)
2. They separated Yeshayahu into 2 parts which yielded the beginning and
second part but the dividing line was perek 32 and not the usual perek 38
3. They compared a controversial teshuva of either Ritva or Rashba and
found it was the Ritva
4. They showed that the letters in Genizat Charson are not from Baal
HaTanya (like the opinion of Ger and against Lubavitch)
5. They showed that "Torah Le-Shma" was indeed written by Ben-Ish_chai
6. Dividing the torah into 2 parts yieldedstandard academic  Priest vs
non-Priest diivision except for the first perek of Beresshit
    dividing into 3 parts gave Devarim as a a separate author
    dividing into 4 parts gave no known division

problems with the method - one needs to specify in advance how many authors
R. Breuer would explain that G-d speaks in several voices
Has nothing to do with Torah mi-Sinai since we can't compare the Torah to
other Sinaitic texts

--------------------
Rav Sherlo spoke on medical ethics (in addition to being a head of a Hesder
Yeshiva he sits/sat on several government boards involving medical ethics)
He changed his talk from the abstract which was to discuss several specific
cases in detail. Instead he gave an overview
Four challenges of Mada to Torah in order of difficulty
1. Modern day questions - eg transplants, motherhood, internet,
electricity, status of a chiloni etc
    main problem is that there is no Mesorah and many of thee teshuvot are
far-fetched
2. Experiments on soldiers (how much choice do they have) , surgery on the
brain
3. Areas were Torah an Science  disagree - eg use of DNA for identification
with regard to agunot, burial
    age of the earth, the definition of "ones", deaf
4. Free will, is rain deterministic- prayers for lack of rain and thanks
for appropriate rain, beracha on eclipse, prayer in general

The most difficult area deal with brain research sin that is internal to us
rather than external. Consciousness
There are several approaches to conflicts
1. attacks on science - Darwin isnt proved, meteorology is inexact,  Carbon
dating isnt proved.
     Someone even claimed that elections are not deterministic as G-d can
change the ballots between the time they are voted and the time they are
counted.
2. Re-interpret the Torah - This was the approach of Rambam.
    A modern attempt - murderer has no free will he is punished to save
society not a  punishment
3. Ignore issues that are not immediate - e archaeology, free will etc. no
connection between Torah and science
4. View the to as not enemies - but a challenge
     Chadash is not prohibited it is allowed after the Omer is brought
     greater insight is brought by the nee to define deaf or the moment of
death or the concept of  "ones and ratzon" in light of modern science
     Homosexuality is prohibited by the Torah - but society's treatment of
a homosexual can be changed

One way Torah an impact on modern society is the "basket of medicine"
approved in many countries for government help.
In Israel  IVF is approved for 2 children no matter how long it takes.
Diseases that are (partially) caused by the patient have less ssupport - eg
lung cancer due to smoking and AIDS due to homosexual activity

---------------------------------------
Prof. Koslovsky of head of  Psychology at Bar Ilan

New area of psychology is the impact of brain research -
effect of drugs on free will
difference between "mind" and the brain - do actions start with the mind
telling the brain or does the brain tell the mind what it is doing
correlations seem to show that the brain makes decisions before the mind
knows.
determinism is favored base on Occam's razor
genetics - a court in France gave only 1 year in prison to a murderer who
had a XYY gene which has been associated with violence
Josephus explains that the Pershum believed in limited free will, the
Saduccees in complete free will and the Essenes in no free will.
Koslovsky's personal belief was in line with Rav Dessler and the Perushin
in a limited free will.
Studies show that mental illness add even physical illness is affected by
free will.

--------------------------------------
other talks and posters
LED and microwave should be permitted on shabbat even according to CI as no
circuits are closed.
Only problem is "Zilzul shabbat" and so is only permitted in special cases.
More generally old decisions need to be re-evaluated based on changes in
technology

Argument between Rabbenu Tam and the Gra over Shekia is really a machloket
between Rava & Yerushalmi against  others in the gemara.
Contradiction between 2 sugyot is really just 2 opinions
Careful  experiments show one can see 3 stars 14 minutes after sunset

Maharil says that Kiddush Hachodesh ends exactly (to the minute)) at half
way through the month.(not like the Tur)
 not coincidentally the mechanical clock was invented shortly before his
time

----------------------------
Symposium was on Jews in space
one said that Jews always arrive late on the scene but it is inevitable -
like moving to America.
Another pointed out that the Gra said one should not live above the 66th
parallel as there are too many questions.


-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120403/4ee2251d/attachment-0001.htm>

Please see http://tinyurl.com/6lnw6ms



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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 30, Issue 12
**************************************

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..."