Avodah Mailing List

Volume 30: Number 120

Thu, 23 Aug 2012

• 1. Birchat Hagomeil (Joel Schnur)
• 2. mashiach birthday (Saul.Z.New...@kp.org)
• 3. Re: is this ok? (T6...@aol.com)
• 4. hillel and Shamai (Eli Turkel)
• 5. mezuzah (Eli Turkel)
• 6. Re: mezuzah (Micha Berger)
• 7. Re: MEZUZAH: PROTECTIVE AMULET OR RELIGIOUS SYMBOL? (Micha Berger)
• 8. Re: MEZUZAH: PROTECTIVE AMULET OR RELIGIOUS SYMBOL? (Micha Berger)
• 9. Re: mezuzah (Zev Sero)
• 10. How Does G"d Put On Tefillin (Arie Folger)
• 11. history (Eli Turkel)
• 12. Re: history (Micha Berger)
• 13. Historical Mishnayot (Liron Kopinsky)
• 14. mi k(h)mocha (shalomy...@comcast.net)
• 15. Re: mi k(h)mocha (Micha Berger)

According to the Gra, the bracha is gomel l'cha.yaw.vim not ha.go.mel. He
holds like girsas haRif v'Rosh

 

 

Message: 4

Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 14:29:37 -0400

From: "Rich, Joel" <JR...@sibson.com>

To: "A High-Level Torah Discussion Group (avo...@lists.aishdas.org)"

      <avo...@lists.aishdas.org>

Subject: [Avodah] Birchat Hagomeil

Message-ID:

 
<E0F39F1E5D787144B56F532B726FF44206F4A0B...@NYCEXCL03.segal.segalco.com>

      

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

 

Berachot 54b is the source gemara for this bracha.  

 

___________________________

Joel Schnur

Senior VP

Government Affairs/Public Relations

Schnur Associates, Inc.

1350 Avenue of the Americas

Suite 1200

New York, NY 10019

 

Tel. 212-489-0600 x204

Fax. 212-489-0203 

 <mailto:j...@schnurassociates.com> j...@schnurassociates.com 

 <http://www.schnurassociates.com/> www.schnurassociates.com 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120822/2e8ea2b7/attachment-0001.htm>

http://parsha.blogspot.com/2012/08/interesting-posts-and-articles-38
0.html 

 see here  item number  2  .  on whether  the  below  calculation  ,  to 
prove  that the  purported  Messiah  [ MMS]   was  needed 
http://hezbos.blogspot.com/2012/06/day-rebbe-was-conceived.html 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120822/7c318e1a/attachment-0001.htm>

 
 
From: saul newman <_newman400@gmail.com_ (mailto:newman...@gmail.com) >

>>  why does an ex-meshumad toivel? is there not an inyan of  removing
tum'ah?

let's assume he were wearing a crucifix. could he  then put on tfillin ?

what about [assuming he understands the bracha] his  thoughts when he
says Hashem's name? is it ok to be believing an entity other  than
Hashem is part of a godhead? or to be thinking 'X is  messiah'
'messiah is G-d or part of G-d' while he makes the bracha?  <<
 



>>>>>
 


Should a Lubavitcher put tefillin on a meshumad? IMO, no. It feeds into the 
 false belief that a person can be a Jew and a Christian at the same time 
-- "a  completed Jew" in their lingo. Whatever mitzva the meshumad gets from 
putting on  tefillin, it's yatza secharo behefsedo in affirming his belief 
that he is a  good, kosher Jew.



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




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120822/8dda6150/attachment-0001.htm>

<< Hillel and Shammai have all of three machloqesin that they didn't
eventually agree upon. Which is why the gemara asks what happened that their
talmidim had so many machloqesin. "Shelo shimshu es rabosam." >>

The gemara brings the case that Hillel wanted to bring a certain korban on
YomTov and had to hide the fact from the Shamaites who were presnt in the
Bet Hamikdash. The implication is that even though Hillel was Nasi he
couldnt do things he felt were allowed.


-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120823/27dd853c/attachment-0001.htm>

<< The point is that the only legitimate criterion by which the
efficacy of mitsvat mezuzah should be measured is the depth
relationship with God that it has inspired. >>

Nevertheless it is brought down that the mezuza protects the house (see
story with Onkeles).

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120823/4758803b/attachment-0001.htm>

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 01:23:06PM +0300, Eli Turkel wrote:
: Nevertheless it is brought down that the mezuza protects the house (see
: story with Onkeles).

The Rambam would say that the mitzvah of mezuzah earns shemirah. Straight
sekhar va'onesh, nothing about the power of an object.

Which then raises questions about Rav (Y-mi Pei'ah 1:1 15b) or Rebbe
giving a mezuzah to Ardevan and saying it was more prescious than a pearl
because it provides sheirah. We discussed whether the gemara could be
understood as a non-Jew getting the mitzvah of an eino metzuveh ve'oseh,
and still getting the shemiras as a reward. After all, he too is obligated
to remember the true Provider of all protection.

It might be relevent that the recipient was Ardevan, probably Artevan IV,
the last Parthian king. And thus of a culture which respected the sacred
of most religions, but the monarchy was personally Zoaroastian (shituf,
not AZ). Otherwise one could ask whether the mezuzah was allowed to
be given, would the recipient use the mezuzah in a way that earns him
anything, etc...

The question of mezuzah as amulet vs sekhar mitzvah would differ in
effect in the case of someone who has their mezuzah checked as require
kehalakhah, but kelapei Shemaya galya that it became pasul. The mitzvah
is being done properly, sekhar shouldn't depend on the physical state. But
the amulet aspect simply isn't there.

Also related: does a qemeiah work if it doesn't invoke bitachon? Does
non-kosher food cause timtum haleiv if eaten in a context where mutar
(infancy, choleh, following a rov where it happens to be the mi'ut
occured, etc...)?

But we visited this topic too many times for me to believe RYL, you or
I have anything to say we haven't said already repeatedly. Maybe a new
member could stir the pot with his/her opinion?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             When a king dies, his power ends,
mi...@aishdas.org        but when a prophet dies, his influence is just
http://www.aishdas.org   beginning.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                    - Soren Kierkegaard

On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 04:37:15PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote:
> One may download this article that appeared in Tradition at  
> http://www.mesora.org/mezuza-gordon.pdf
>
> Towards the end of this article the author writes
...

Mesora.org is hyper-rationalist, though, and not typical of O thought.
Eg: they tell you that there is no basis for saying tehillim in an eis
tzarah <http://www.mesora.org/tehillim5770.htm>, they reject Qabbalah
without even mentioning the Ramban, etc... I therefore don't find their
rejection of mezuzah-as-amulet as overly meaningful, even if I'm inclined
to agree with their conclusion.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 04:37:15PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote:
> One may download this article that appeared in Tradition at  
> http://www.mesora.org/mezuza-gordon.pdf
>
> Towards the end of this article the author writes
...

Mesora.org is hyper-rationalist, though, and not typical of O thought.
Eg: they tell you that there is no basis for saying tehillim in an eis
tzarah <http://www.mesora.org/tehillim5770.htm>, they reject Qabbalah
without even mentioning the Ramban, etc... I therefore don't find their
rejection of mezuzah-as-amulet as overly meaningful, even if I'm inclined
to agree with their conclusion.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

On 23/08/2012 10:37 AM, Micha Berger wrote:
> The question of mezuzah as amulet vs sekhar mitzvah would differ in
> effect in the case of someone who has their mezuzah checked as require
> kehalakhah, but kelapei Shemaya galya that it became pasul. The mitzvah
> is being done properly, sekhar shouldn't depend on the physical state. But
> the amulet aspect simply isn't there.

We've had this out before.  If the mezuzah is pasul then the mitzvah
is *not* being done properly.  Anus rachmana patreih, and he won't
ch"v be punished as if he'd deliberately neglected the mitzvah, but
keman de`avad lo amrinan, and he has not earned the sechar.   Just
as if a mikveh is discovered to have been pasul when a tamei person
used it, he can't be punished ch"v for having handled terumah, entered
the mikdash, etc., but the fact is that he is tamei, and the terumah
he touched is tamei.   If someone believed in good faith that he was
Jewish and then discovers that he isn't, the animal he shechted is
treif, the mezuzah he wrote is pasul, the person he was motzi in a
mitzvah has to do it again, etc.  Sechar mitzvah is for *doing* it,
not for *thinking* you did it.   This is pashut and I don't see how
anyone can claim otherwise.

-- 
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

Dear Ovedim,

About ten days ago someone posted a link to an article in Tablet
magazine critical of aggadeta's theology. Posters on list focussed on
the author's focus on demonology, however I want to address his other
points, about antropomorphism in the aggadeta, particularly regarding
G"d's tefillin. I penned a response on my blog, which I am linking to
here: http://ariefolger.wordpr
ess.com/2012/08/17/did-the-talmud-suggest-gd-has-a-head-learning-to-interpr
et-rabbinic-legend/

I also wrote my interpretation of another aggadeta, also in Berakhot,
but on 4a, regarding the names of King David's second son. You may
find it here: http://ariefolger.wordpress.com/2012/08/20/plumbing-the-de
pths-of-aggaddic-exegesis/

In that latter article, I make a rather general claim about aggadic
exegesis, typified by my approach that when R' Yochanan says that lo
Kileav shemo ella Daniel Schemo, velama niqra shemo Kileav ..., he is
actually engaging in peshuto shel miqra and teaching that in aggadeta
fashion, but it's really about peshat.

Reactions welcome. Kol tuv,

-- 
Arie Folger,
Recent blog posts on http://ariefolger.wordpress.com/
* Toleranz aber ohne Respekt ? zwei Artikel zur Brit Mil?
* Ein Volk, eine Gemeinde ? R?ckblick auf dem Freitagabend-Anlass
* Die Beschneidung ist im Judentum unentbehrlich
* Joe the Pumber, Guns Control and the Lethal Oppression of the Masses
* Offene Brief an die Redaktion von ?Die Zeit?
* Alle sind gleich vor dem Schabbat, dem hochmodernen Ruhetag
* Thoughts on a Polarizing Society
* Do we Owe Respect to Old Bones?

:> What ethical purpose is served by preserving a realistic historic
:> picture? Nothing but the satisfaction of curiosity. We should tell
:> ourselves and our children the good memories of the good people, their
:> unshakable faith, their staunch defense of tradition, their life of
:> truth, their impeccable honesty, their boundless charity and their
:> great reverence for Torah and Torah sages. What is gained by pointing
:> out their inadequacies and their contradictions? We want to be inspired
:> by their example and learn from their experience...

There is a basic flaw in this argument. If the only censorship was
that of a gadol doing an explicit sin, R. Schwab has a point (with the
opposing view of Rav Hutner). However, in reality most of the censorship
is about things the gadol did knowingly. However, today our standards
are different and so eliminate it from their biographies (eg reading
secular books or newspapers).

He essence we are saying that we know more than this gadol and so change
the facts. If RSZA held a high opinion of RAYK and we don't share that
viewpoint we simply decide that we know more than RSZA and so change
history. This has nothing to do with being inspired by their example. In
fact we are not interested in their examples when it differs from our
haskafa.

-- 
Eli Turkel

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 01:13:31PM +0300, Eli Turkel wrote:
::> What ethical purpose is served by preserving a realistic historic
::> picture? Nothing but the satisfaction of curiosity. We should tell
::> ourselves and our children the good memories of the good people, their
::> unshakable faith, their staunch defense of tradition, their life of
::> truth, their impeccable honesty, their boundless charity and their
::> great reverence for Torah and Torah sages. What is gained by pointing
::> out their inadequacies and their contradictions? We want to be inspired
::> by their example and learn from their experience...

: There is a basic flaw in this argument. If the only censorship was
: that of a gadol doing an explicit sin, R. Schwab has a point (with the
: opposing view of Rav Hutner). However, in reality most of the censorship
: is about things the gadol did knowingly....

I think you're not complaining about anything RSSchwab said, but rather
about the gap between what he supported ommitting and what people are
actually censoring.

I also think you mean the issue is more what the gadol did knowingly
because they thought it was right. Aside from removing sins, inadvertant
or even bemeizid, we are censoring out support for shitos by pretending
the gadol didn't hold that way. Making it look like various perfectly
mesoretic positions (sometimes even the historical rov!) are wrong or
avante gard.

I can see two etiologies that would get us to this point:

Option 1: The audience is judged as likely to think less of the gadol if
they read such facts about them, rather than being likely to accept it
as proof the permissability of the act or acceptability of that concept.

Option 2: Editorial melevolence -- they are actively trying to promote
one shitah over the other even to the extent of dishonestly.

The problem in either case is the assurendess implied, an unwarranted
confidence that one has the one true way. Whether we ascribe it to a
judgment about the typical reader or about the editor's belief that one
may skew the data in favor of that one true way.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Every child comes with the message
mi...@aishdas.org        that God is not yet discouraged with
http://www.aishdas.org   humanity.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                   - Rabindranath Tagore

The Mishna in Rosh HaShana says that in the olden days, they used to use
fires to transmit when Rosh Chodesh was, until the Cuthim went about
messing them up. It then lists the path that the fires used to travel from
Yerushalaim to the Golah.

What is the purpose of this historical information? Why do I care where the
fires went, as we no longer have fires today? Is it purely so that if the
conditions changed (and there were no Cuthim and there was kiddush al pi
reiya) that we would revert to that original method and need all the
details?

Kol Tuv,

-- 
Liron Kopinsky
liron.kopin...@gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120823/bd2e2df5/attachment-0001.htm>

In the b'rachot after shema, why do we say mi KHamokha baeilim HaShem, 
mi Kamokha nedar bakodesh. In other words, why is there a dagesh in 
the second Kamokha, but not in the first? 
Thanks. 
Steve 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120823/4b0e5360/attachment-0001.htm>

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 09:29:43PM +0000, shalomy...@comcast.net wrote:
: In the b'rachot after shema, why do we say mi KHamokha baeilim HaShem, 
: mi Kamokha nedar bakodesh. In other words, why is there a dagesh in 
: the second Kamokha, but not in the first? 

A diqduq question is really more for <meso...@aishdas.org> than here.

You're asking about Shemos 15:11, not really the siddur. It's in the
mesoretic notes on the chumash that that's the niqud.

The Beis Yoseif writes that one must be careful to pronounce the kaf
of the second "mi kamokha" so that that it doesn't sound like one were
saying "Who is like you among the gods, Hashem? Mikhah", referring to
Pesel Mikhah (not myself).

Grammatically speaking:

"Mi khamokha" implies the two words are read together, so that the vowel
at the end of "mi" softens the khaf at the start of "khamokha". OTOH,
"mi kamokha" would normally imply it should be read more separated. And
the trop matches: the first "mi-khamokha" has a maqaf connecting the
words, the "mi kamokha" does not.

There are two other such inconsistancies in Pesuqei Dezimra -- this is
based on the mesoretic text, not your siddur publisher:

Tehillim 148:2:
    Haleluhu khol mal'akhav
    haleluhu kol  tzeva'av

and Teh' 150:5:
    Heleluhu vetziltzelei shama
    Heleluhu betziltzelei seru'ah

And again the trop too fits. In both cases the first iteration has a
merkha for haleluhu connecting it to the next word, and the second has a
revia-mugrash (a trop specific to sifrei Emes -- Iyov, Mishlei, Tehillim).

Notice that in all three cases, the first iteration has the second word
start rafui (soft, ie undotted), and flowing from the first word, and
the second iteration has it degushah and separate. I figure that might
imply a pattern, but I don't know what it would be.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             You cannot propel yourself forward
mi...@aishdas.org        by patting yourself on the back.
http://www.aishdas.org                   -Anonymous
Fax: (270) 514-1507


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 30, Issue 120
***************************************

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..."