Avodah Mailing List

Volume 30: Number 36

Thu, 10 May 2012

• 1. PULLING THE PLUG (cantorwolb...@cox.net)
• 2. Re: Recording people without their knowledge (Moshe Y. Gluck)
• 3. Halachic Entanglement (Micha Berger)
• 4. Re: Recording people without their knowledge (Micha Berger)
• 5. Re: Recording people without their knowledge (Lisa Liel)
• 6. Re: Recording people without their knowledge (Rich, Joel)
• 7. Re: Recording people without their knowledge (Moshe Y. Gluck)
• 8. Re: forcing a GET (kennethgmil...@juno.com)
• 9. Re: Recording people without their knowledge (Lisa Liel)
• 10. Re: forcing a GET (Daniel Eidensohn)
• 11. Re: forcing a GET (Micha Berger)
• 12. Re: Recording people without their knowledge (Micha Berger)
• 13. Daas Torah Rerere...redux - Pesachim 112a (Micha Berger)
• 14. Theoretical Halachah (Micha Berger)
• 15. Re: Daas Torah Rerere...redux - Pesachim 112a (Ben Waxman)
• 16. Re: Daas Torah Rerere...redux - Pesachim 112a (Lisa Liel)
• 17. Re: Daas Torah Rerere...redux - Pesachim 112a (Micha Berger)
• 18. Re: forcing a GET (Daniel Eidensohn)
• 19. Re: forcing a GET (Micha Berger)

E.T. wrote:  Rav Zilberstein has mentioned this heter in shiurim to doctors. While in
theory it sounds fine I dont think it is ever used in practice

I think that begs the issue.
It is much too important and significant to dismiss summarily.
If it is acceptable in theory, then it certainly has many significant applications.
If it were you or a loved one, chas v'shalom, and you knew that halachically,
you didn't have to prolong a life that was hanging by a thread, would you just say: Well, 
in theory, it's fine to allow nature to take its course, but in practice, I'll continue prolonging unnecessary and horrible suffering?

On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 01:08:19PM -0500, Lisa Liel wrote:
: What issur is involved in recording someone without their knowledge?  I 
: can't think of any.

V'ahavta L'reiacha Kamocha.

KT,
MYG

In Quantum Mechanics, two particles can interact in a way that
measurements later made of one will immediately change the state of the
other. No matter how far apart they are. (Here is an explanation from
Scientific American <http://bit.ly/KMV5YO>.)

Well, I think I encountered the halachic equivalent at Y-mi Chagiga 3:2
(vilna 17a-b, the top of both amudim, in particular). Someone takes a
qometz of flour for a minchah out of the keli qodesh. If the nosar becomes
tamei, or the qometz does, they are considered still connected and the
other is tamei as well. From the pasuq "kaf achas".

R' Yaaqov bar Acha, R' Yosa besheim R"Y: if you have a minchah split
between two dishes, if one becomes tamei, the other becomes tamei. And
if there is another dish with a second minchah in the middle, it does not.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 32nd day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        4 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Netzach sheb'Hod: What type of submission
Fax: (270) 514-1507                 really results in dominating others?

On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 09:17:08PM -0500, Lisa Liel wrote:
>> I can see arguing that sharing such a recording with others violates the
>> cheirem deRabbeinu Gershom about reading others' mail. In both cases,
>> someone's communication is being brought to more people than he intended
>> and is aware of.

> I'm not convinced.

I'm not convinced either. As I wrote, "I can see arguing..." That's not
quite unequivical endorsement.

>                     Reading someone's mail is, I think, more of an
> infringement on the recipient than it is on the sender.

But it is already taken to include the recipient sharing the mail without
the author's permission, which is more parallel to our case. This comes
up in teshuvos about publishing privately written teshuvos. (Where the
discussion ends up being about whether the tzibbur owns the author's
Torah already.)

Yoma 4b talks about repeating something someone told you. Maybe it's
related, maybe this is a new line of argument.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 33rd day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        4 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Hod sheb'Hod: LAG B'OMER - What is total
Fax: (270) 514-1507               submission to truth, and what results?

On 5/9/2012 6:57 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> I can see arguing that sharing such a recording with others violates the
> cheirem deRabbeinu Gershom about reading others' mail. In both cases,
> someone's communication is being brought to more people than he intended
> and is aware of.

I'm not convinced.  Reading someone's mail is, I think, more of an 
infringement on the recipient than it is on the sender.

On 5/9/2012 7:39 PM, Moshe Y. Gluck wrote:
> On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 01:08:19PM -0500, Lisa Liel wrote:
>: What issur is involved in recording someone without their knowledge?  I
>: can't think of any.

> V'ahavta L'reiacha Kamocha.

Please elaborate.  I don't see it.

Lisa

What issur is involved in recording someone without their knowledge?  I 
can't think of any.
_______________________________________________
Playing it back may be the issur of baal tomar -repeating what you were told without permission
KT
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.

On 5/9/2012 7:39 PM, Moshe Y. Gluck wrote:
> On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 01:08:19PM -0500, Lisa Liel wrote:
> : What issur is involved in recording someone without their knowledge?  I
> : can't think of any.
>
> V'ahavta L'reiacha Kamocha.
>    
R'n LL:
Please elaborate.  I don't see it.
----------------------


the recording with others?

KT,
MYG

R"n Toby Katz posted a link to
http://getamarriage.com/HarChoko_of_RabbeinuTam.htm

Her summary was:
> Letter from R' Dovid Eidensohn warning that certain types of
> activity that are becoming more common in the US, actions intended
> to help agunos -- namely, certain kinds of public pressure on
> husbands to  give a GET (including ostracizing and public
> humiliation) -- may  result in gitten that are halachically
> invalid, may be halachically forbidden, and also may be damaging
> to the innocent children of the men involved....

As I understood that article, RDE draws a distinction between a case where
"a woman demands a GET because she doesn?t like the husband", and other
cases. He holds that "we may ostracize only when the husband has ...
definitely committed some sin, and is definitely someone the Talmud
requires to divorce."

Is he accusing a community of being united to ostracize someone en masse,
in a situation where the local halachic authority(s) did NOT declare that
husband as being required to divorce? Perhaps I'm just foolishly naive, but
I would hope that no community would be so united except in such cases as
where the local authorities endorsed the ostracization.

(I am also very offended by his comment (in the final paragraph), addressed
to people who engage in activities which he feels result in pasul gitten,
that "If this keeps up, your children will not be able to marry Haredi
children." My understanding is that the halacha does not distinguish
between Haredim and any other kind of Jew. If a situation arises in which
someone is not able to marry a Haredi, then he/she is unable to marry other
Jews as well. And if there is a machloskes haposkim involved, the lines
would be drawn by the psak of each posek, not by any labels.)

Akiva Miller


____________________________________________________________
53 Year Old Mom Looks 33
The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4fab1fca6fac81009d40st02vuc

On 5/9/2012 9:30 PM, Moshe Y. Gluck wrote:
> On 5/9/2012 7:39 PM, Moshe Y. Gluck wrote:
>    
>> On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 01:08:19PM -0500, Lisa Liel wrote:
>> : What issur is involved in recording someone without their knowledge?  I
>> : can't think of any.
>>
>> V'ahavta L'reiacha Kamocha.
>>
>>      
> R'n LL:
> Please elaborate.  I don't see it.
> ----------------------
>
> Not sure what you're asking. Unless you mean recording them and not sharing
> the recording with others?
>    
How is sharing the recording a violation of v'ahavta l'reiacha k'mocha?

Lisa

Just want to go on record as disagreeing with Rabbi Bergers understanding
- I am not going to rehash something which has been discussed in great
detail on [another venue]

I'll simply comment on one of his assertions

Rabbi Berger states "This is also against Israeli norm, *where many
gittin* are given under the threat of imprisonment."

I just posted a translation of Justice Menachem Elon (2005) regarding
the matter: (he also disagrees with Rabbi Berger's understanding that
we posken like the Rambam)

He states:
*In reality however this[use of imprisonment] almost never happens.*
Let me explain my words. According to the section of the law, it is
possible to imprison the husband in a case where the beis din has
ordered that the husband be forced to give a get. However if the beis
din only issues a ruling that the husband is obligated to give a get -
and sometimes the language is even weaker and they simply say that it
is a mitzva to give a get or that it is proper to give a get -- then
it is not allowed to imprison the recalcitrant husband. The reason that
the law requires that the beis din specifies that the husband is to be
forced before he can be imprisoned is in order to avoid the possibility
of a get me'usa. A get me'usa is a get which is coerced against the will
of the husband and is thus invalid. *There are only a limited number of
cases where force can used in giving a get according to the halacha.*
Thus it is understandable why the secular law included a clause that a
husband can not be imprisoned when he refuses to give a get except when
the rabbinic court rules that it is necessary to force him to give a get.

*In fact the rabbinic courts very rarely issues a psak which says to
force get*. In the overwhelming majority of cases it simply says that
there is an obligation to give the get or languae which is even milder.
That is consistent with the view of those religious authorities that one
does not psaken to force a get except in a small number of rare cases
which are explicitly mentioned in the Talmud.

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 01:08:23PM +0300, Daniel Eidensohn wrote:
: Rabbi Berger states "This is also against Israeli norm, *where many
: gittin* are given under the threat of imprisonment."
: 
: I just posted a translation of Justice Menachem Elon (2005) regarding
: the matter: (he also disagrees with Rabbi Berger's understanding that
: we posken like the Rambam)
: 
: He states:
: *In reality however this[use of imprisonment] almost never happens.*
: Let me explain my words. According to the section of the law, it is
: possible to imprison the husband in a case where the beis din has
: ordered that the husband be forced to give a get. However if the beis
: din only issues a ruling that the husband is obligated to give a get -
: and sometimes the language is even weaker and they simply say that it
: is a mitzva to give a get or that it is proper to give a get -- then
: it is not allowed to imprison the recalcitrant husband....

That just means that the threat is in practice rarely carried out.

The husband still enters precedings knowing that if he messes up, he
could end up being forced to choose. And his agreement does factor
in that threat of imprisonment.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 07:16:42AM -0500, Lisa Liel wrote:
>> On 5/9/2012 7:39 PM, Moshe Y. Gluck wrote:
>>>> V'ahavta L'reiacha Kamocha.

>>> Please elaborate.  I don't see it.

>> Not sure what you're asking. Unless you mean recording them and not sharing
>> the recording with others?

> How is sharing the recording a violation of v'ahavta l'reiacha k'mocha?

If the recording is without their knowledge because you assume
they wouldn't agree to being recorded, presumably he doesn't want it
shared. Doing what they don't want would be ma desani lakh, and thus a
violation of ve'ahavta lereiakha kamokha.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

    Tana rabbanan: R' Aviva commanded his son R' Yehoshua 7 things. "My
    son:
    - Do not sit in the well-trafficked part of the city to review
      [Torah].
    - Do not live in a city whose leaders are talmidei chakhamim.
    - Do not enter your home without warning, all the moreso your
      friend's house.
    - Do not withhold shoes from your feet.
    - Do not get up early and eat. In the summer, because of the heat; in
      the winter, because of the cold.
    - Make your shabbos chol rather than depend on people.
    - Do your business with someone who is in a time of success.
                                    - Pesachim 112a

Persumably one would argue that someone who lives off tzedaqah in order
to learn full time does minimize their Shabbos thereby as well, and
thus follow #6.

But what about #2, which appears to be the exact opposite of having a
gov't that relies on daas Torah?

See also Rashi ad loc:
    Ve'al tadur be'ir...:
    Detarud begirseih velo bemilei detzibura.

Isn't Rashi saying that a TC who spends his time with texts lacks the
knowledge of what's going on in the society in question to be a good
leader?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 33rd day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        4 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Hod sheb'Hod: LAG B'OMER - What is total
Fax: (270) 514-1507               submission to truth, and what results?

We touched on this a few times in the past. Often head-on, in threads
initiated by RRW (cc-ed), sometimes in discussions of shiurim (and the
CI and CC not following their own sefarim) or in a discussion of all
the times the CC didn't practice like the MB.

The maqor for considering theoretical discussion and halakhah lemaaseh
distinct, is probably BB 130b. R' Aba suggests that a machloqes is
based upon "Mar savar halakhah adifa, umar savar maaseh". To which the
gemara responds,
    Tanu Rabbanan:
        Ein lemeidin halakhah
        lo mipi limud
        velo mipi maaseh
        ad sheyomeru lo halakhah lemaaseh.

In honor of my finishing the mesechta this morning (disabled truck in
the Lincoln Tunnel extended my commute and so now I'm ahead of the daf),
I wish to also mention Y-mi Chagiga 1:8 (vilna 7b), cited by Rashi ad
loc, and the Qorban haEidah sham.

    R' Te'ira besheim Shemu'el:
        Ein morin
        lo min hahalakhos
        velo min ha'agados
        velo min hatosafos
        ela min hatalmud.
    ...
    Rabbi Chananyah besheim Shemu'el:
        Ein lemeidin min hahorayah
    Hakol modin she'ein lemeidin min hamaaseh.

Rashi on BB and the QhE on Y-mi Chagiga say the worry about lemeidin min
hamaaseh is that looking at a single case is insufficient to rule out
error. Implying it's okay to learn halakhah from rabbinically approved
norms (mimeticism).

Rashi "ad sheyomeru lo halakhal lemaaseh" is long, for a Rashi. It
discusses our repeated topic of how to pasqen.

First Rashi says that it is a problem to assume the halakhah is like the
conclusion of a mishnah because the halakhah moved on during the days
of the amora'im. After all, R' Ashi veRavina sof hora'ah, not the tannaim.

Then he says the reason for "ad sheyomru lo halakhah lemaaseh" is that
a rav might be machmir on himself and didn't want some ruling to become
a norm. Or maybe he changed his mind since.

Then he returns and says "ad sheyomar lo halakhah lemaaseh" means "badai
kemo shepasqu haacharonim, kakh taaseh" -- and that chiddush after R'
Ashi veRavina is still possible.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 33rd day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        4 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Hod sheb'Hod: LAG B'OMER - What is total
Fax: (270) 514-1507               submission to truth, and what results?

To me it sounds like it says that the mayor-rabbi spends too much time 
learning to be an effective manager of the city.  Maybe he is being 
derelict in his duties, but he isn't ignorant.

Ben

On 5/10/2012 8:42 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> See also Rashi ad loc:
>      Ve'al tadur be'ir...:
>      Detarud begirseih velo bemilei detzibura.
>
> Isn't Rashi saying that a TC who spends his time with texts lacks the
> knowledge of what's going on in the society in question to be a good
> leader?

On 5/10/2012 12:42 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
>      - Do not live in a city whose leaders are talmidei chakhamim.
>
> But what about #2, which appears to be the exact opposite of having a
> gov't that relies on daas Torah?
>
> See also Rashi ad loc:
>      Ve'al tadur be'ir...:
>      Detarud begirseih velo bemilei detzibura.
>
> Isn't Rashi saying that a TC who spends his time with texts lacks the
> knowledge of what's going on in the society in question to be a good
> leader?
>    
Rashi is saying that Rabbi Akiva is only saying not to live in a town 
where the leaders learn Torah *to the exclusion* of community issues.

Lisa

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 12:51:26PM -0500, Lisa Liel wrote:
>> See also Rashi ad loc:
>>      Ve'al tadur be'ir...:
>>      Detarud begirseih velo bemilei detzibura.

>> Isn't Rashi saying that a TC who spends his time with texts lacks the
>> knowledge of what's going on in the society in question to be a good
>> leader?

> Rashi is saying that Rabbi Akiva is only saying not to live in a town  
> where the leaders learn Torah *to the exclusion* of community issues.

There is no "eilu talmidei chakhamim sheheim..." or similar construction.
I see Rashi as saying this is a norm for talmidei chakhamim. A talmud
chakham is not tarud bemilei detzibura, and therefore can't lead.

In any case, Daas Torah about following Rabban Gamliel, not exclusively
the Rabbi Yehoshua's of the world. (Reffering to Berakhos 28a.) As the
latter put it, speaking of R' Gamliel, "Oi lo ledor she'atah paranaso,
she'i atah yodeia betzaaran shel TC."

The argument I'm building appears (now that I find myself quoting that
maaseh about R' Gamliel) to be that of RALichtenstein. Even if we agree
that daas Torah is a real phenomenon, it requires that the TC you're
listening to knows the world beyond the beis medrash about which you're
asking.

See RAL's sichah, transcribed <http://bit.ly/A1zsvv>, R' Joseph Faith's
unauthorized translation
<http://www.zootorah.com/RationalistJudaism/DaatTorahLichtenstein.pdf>
and if you're curious, my impressions when R Marty Bluke posted the
link, <http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol29/v29n013.shtml#04>.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 33rd day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        4 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Hod sheb'Hod: LAG B'OMER - What is total
Fax: (270) 514-1507               submission to truth, and what results?

that is not what he says. Please reread this paragraph.  he says that If 
the claims are not cases where poskim allow force -e.g., not cases where 
the harchakos of Rabbeinu Tam are use which is not considered as force 
by many poskim -  then the court will not write the words that he should 
be forced. Without those words he can not be imprisoned.  Prison can 
only be used in a case where the poskim say force can be used. If it 
isn't one of those cases you can't threaten because there is no chance 
it is going to happen. It can't be used where the decree says he is 
chayiv to give a get or that it is a mitzva to give a get.

Bottom line - your assertion is simply incorrect. Prison is not a 
punishment for "messing up" .

*In fact the rabbinic courts very rarely issues a psak which says to
force get*. In the overwhelming majority of cases it simply says that
there is an obligation to give the get or language which is even milder.
That is consistent with the view of those religious authorities that one
does not psaken to force a get except in a small number of rare cases
which are explicitly mentioned in the Talmud.


On 5/10/2012 7:50 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 01:08:23PM +0300, Daniel Eidensohn wrote:
> : Rabbi Berger states "This is also against Israeli norm, *where many
> : gittin* are given under the threat of imprisonment."
> :
> :[...]
>
> That just means that the threat is in practice rarely carried out.
>
> The husband still enters precedings knowing that if he messes up, he
> could end up being forced to choose. And his agreement does factor
> in that threat of imprisonment.
>
>

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 08:39:17PM +0300, Daniel Eidensohn wrote:
> that is not what he says. Please reread this paragraph.  he says that If  
> the claims are not cases where poskim allow force -e.g., not cases where  
> the harchakos of Rabbeinu Tam are use which is not considered as force  
> by many poskim -  then the court will not write the words that he should  
> be forced. Without those words he can not be imprisoned...

And I didn't speak of imprisonment, I spoke of the threat of imprisonment.
Please reread what I did write.

A man going to a rabbanut endorsed beis din knows that they lock people
up. That knowledge alone is the compulsian I'm talking about. As I
wrote in the first email, "Many gitten are given under the thread of
imprisonment", and clarified in the second (to which you're replying),
"[H]is agreement does factor in that threat of imprisonment." Most
husbands (although until now I wrote only "many") trying to avoid their
wifes' demand for a get would dismiss the possbility from their minds
as some extreme their case could never reach.

According to your brother, any compulsion at all would invalidate the
gett. So I asked why not *fear* of jail?

You quote here someone who says "the harchakos of Rabbeinu Tam which
is not considered as force by many poskim". I said it's the norm. Your
brother was willing to condemn rabbanim as acting outside of halakhah
for holding of it. So I'm not sure how citing someone who says that
harachaqos are usually sufficient defends your bother's position.

In any case, the SA and Rama are clear, and attempts to read other
peshatim into consequent shu"t -- saying both that the majority of shu"t
defy the greater SA and what happens to be the norm (I didn't see anyone
else check) defies the shu"t -- to carry a huge burden of proof.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 33rd day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        4 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Hod sheb'Hod: LAG B'OMER - What is total
Fax: (270) 514-1507               submission to truth, and what results?


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 30, Issue 36
**************************************

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..."