Avodah Mailing List

Volume 32: Number 39

Thu, 13 Mar 2014

• 1. House Minyanim (Prof. Levine)
• 2. Re: Daas Torah and the Holocaust (Micha Berger)
• 3. Re: Esther in a hurry (Zev Sero)
• 4. FW: Time for Selichot (Rich, Joel)
• 5. Re: Daas Torah and the Holocaust (Zev Sero)
• 6. kli zayin/gever (Chana Luntz)
• 7. Re: FW: Time for Selichot (Zev Sero)
• 8. Re: Esther in a hurry (Kenneth Miller)
• 9. Norwegian Cruise Line - contact info (Micha Berger)
• 10. Re: Purim: Why Name A Holiday After the Enemy? (T6...@aol.com)
• 11. Drinking on Purim - Halachically Speaking (Prof. Levine)
• 12. Re: Daas Torah and the Holocaust (Rich, Joel)

And here I thought that the solution to every Jewish problem 
was,  "I'll start my own minyan!" >:-}  YL

 From http://www.torahmusings.com/2014/03/house-minyanim/

Introduction

In recent years it has become increasingly popular for minyanim to 
gather in people's private homes, rather than exclusively in shuls. 
The motivations for holding such minyanim include, but are not 
limited to, a closer walk to davening on Shabbos, the desire for a 
quicker tefilah, and the need to accommodate people who are 
physically unable to go to shul. In this essay, we will explore the 
potential halachic issues that arise with davening at a house minyan, 
and arrive at a conclusion as to the propriety of such minyanim.

Before commencing our analysis it is important to frame our 
discussion in three critical ways:

First, this essay will not discuss the permissibility of starting a 
new shul in a community that already has a functioning Orthodox shul. 
There is significant discussion among poskim with regard to the 
halachic advantages and pitfalls to starting a new 
shul.<http://www.torahmusings.com/2014/03/house-minyanim/#fn1-20989>1 
We will limit our discussion to minyanim that meet in homes without 
the intention of establishing a permanent, fully functioning shul.

Second, a "house minyan" comes in many different forms. Some house 
minyanim are more permanent than others. There are house minyanim 
that meet consistently, have an aron kodesh with a sefer torah, and 
take place in a room of the house that is never used for anything 
other than tefilah. Other house minyanim only meet occasionally in a 
regular family room and without a sefer torah. We will raise several 
halachic issues, some of which apply to all minyanim held in a house 
and some of which only apply to some minyanim held in non-dedicated a house.

Finally, the topic of this essay does not involve any formal 
prohibitions, but simply the ideal way to perform a mitzvah. There is 
no prohibition to daven in a home, just as there is no formal 
prohibition to daven without a minyan. Clearly, the halachah strongly 
prefers tefilah betzibbur and demands making certain sacrifices in 
order to daven with a tzibbur. The issues at hand are: the optimal 
way to perform a mitzvah, whether the halachah demands sacrificing 
convenience in order to daven in a shul, and whether hosting or 
supporting a house minyan is tantamount to establishing a subpar 
standard for tefilah.

See the above URL for more. YL

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20140313/1c185645/attachment-0001.htm>

On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 09:38:23AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote:
> From http://www.yivoencyclopedia.org/article.aspx/Belz_Hasidic_Dynasty
>
> Yissachar?s son Aharon Rokeach (1880?1957) succeeded his father and 
> became the fourth Belz rebbe. Escaping from the ghetto of Bochnia in  
> 1943, he and his brother Mordekhai Rokeach of Bilgoraj (1903?1949) 
> settled in  
> <http://www.yivoencyclopedia.org/article.aspx/Budapest>Budapest, where 
> they had a devoted community of Hasidim. In a dramatic speech delivered 
> in January 1944, a day before the brothers left for Palestine and two 
> months before the Nazis invaded Hungary, Mordekhai promised his Hasidim 
> that nothing would happen to Hungarian Jews. This false promise, along 
> with the brothers? personal escape and their abandonment of their 
> Hasidim, provoked criticism of their behavior during a time of crisis.

While I understand why survivors and family of victims really would have
a hard time judging lekaf zekhus, as RARakeffetR notes, objectively speaking
this makes much sense.

The Kastner train was not offering the chassidim escape. So, the
Belzer Rebbe would have turned down his own recue and die with his
chassidim. REWasserman made this choice, but it is not the only possible
right choice. It is halachically problematic, too. In either case,
it wouldn't have saved any of them.

One he chooses to make use of an opportunity to save himself, what should
he have done -- been honest and increased the panic? Or lie?

I could see saying that honesty might have motivated someone to do more
to escape. I could also see saying that the resulting panic would have
left /fewer/ people capable of escaping.

In either case, I can't say that beshe'as ma'aseh it was a criminal
decision to make. It's not even a clear data point against daas Torah.

(Although I do believe that in principle, there is no shortage of such
examples. From those told during the war not to make aliyah to those
told not to get a Sugihara visa, to deciding not to protest on behalf of
Soviet Jews to deciding /to/ protest on behalf of Pollard and Rubashkin,
and thereby forcing the judiciary to prove they mete out apoliticized
justice. In fact, I can't right now think of a single instance where
seeking daas Torah advanced the community toward its desired outcome.)

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Take time,
mi...@aishdas.org        be exact,
http://www.aishdas.org   unclutter the mind.
Fax: (270) 514-1507            - Rabbi Simcha Zissel Ziv, Alter of Kelm

On 13/03/2014 10:13 AM, Eli Turkel wrote:
> The lots of Haman occurs in Nisan and falls on Purim in Adar 11 months later.
>
> 1) Esther says that she has not be called to the king for 30 days.
> What is the rush why not wait a while longer after all there are 11 months to go
>
> 2) Esther suggests a fast for 3 days that includes Pesach. Again why not set the
> fast for after Pesach since there is plenty of time until the following Purim.

Mordechai was the one in a hurry, not Esther.  Esther didn't want to go to
the king, and gave her not having been called for 30 days as an excuse for
not going.  Either (according to e.g. Rashi) this shows that the king is
getting tired of her, and if she shows her face uninvited she will be killed
immediately and do no good, so why go?  Or (according to Malbim) the king
will surely summon her soon, and then she'll be able to put in a good word
when he's in a receptive mood, so why risk her life now?  Mordechai is the
one who rejected her excuses and said there is no time to waste, we only
have 11 months, so we'd better start now.  Go to the king immediately.  So
Esther said in that case I need some ammunition; go fast for three days, to
get Hashem on our side, and then I'll risk my life.  If you want to postpone
the fast till after Pesach, fine, then I'll go after Pesach.


-- 
Zev Sero               A citizen may not be required to offer a 'good and
z...@sero.name          substantial reason' why he should be permitted to
                        exercise his rights. The right's existence is all
                        the reason he needs.
                            - Judge Benson E. Legg, Woollard v. Sheridan

Anyone know why during Elul we say selichot early (before davening) but for fasts we say them after shmone esrai?

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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20140313/611ea349/attachment-0001.htm>

On 13/03/2014 12:41 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 09:38:23AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote:
>>  From http://www.yivoencyclopedia.org/article.aspx/Belz_Hasidic
>>  _Dynasty
>>
>> Yissachar?s son Aharon Rokeach (1880?1957) succeeded his father and
>> became the fourth Belz rebbe. Escaping from the ghetto of Bochnia in
>> 1943, he and his brother Mordekhai Rokeach of Bilgoraj (1903?1949)
>> settled in
>> <http://www.yivoencyclopedia.org/article.aspx/Budapest>Budapest, where
>> they had a devoted community of Hasidim. In a dramatic speech delivered
>> in January 1944, a day before the brothers left for Palestine and two
>> months before the Nazis invaded Hungary, Mordekhai promised his Hasidim
>> that nothing would happen to Hungarian Jews. This false promise, along
>> with the brothers? personal escape and their abandonment of their
>> Hasidim, provoked criticism of their behavior during a time of crisis.

> While I understand why survivors and family of victims really would have
> a hard time judging lekaf zekhus, as RARakeffetR notes, objectively speaking
> this makes much sense.
>
> The Kastner train was not offering the chassidim escape. So, the
> Belzer Rebbe would have turned down his own recue and die with his
> chassidim. REWasserman made this choice, but it is not the only possible
> right choice. It is halachically problematic, too. In either case,
> it wouldn't have saved any of them.

Um, what are you talking about?  What has the Kastner train got to do with
anything?

The entire premise of the article is false.  The Belzer Rebbe was not "rescued",
he did not "escape"; he left Hungary at a time when there was no crisis.  There
is no reason to suppose that he knew there would be a crisis.  The whole point
of his speech was that there would be no crisis, and that people should not
panic at his leaving.  So he was wrong.  That just proved he did not have ruach
hakodesh, at least at that moment.  But the writer doesn't believe in ruach
hakodesh in the first place, so how is that a criticism?  Only one who believes
that the Belzer had ruach hakodesh, and knew what was coming, has the right to
call his speech a lie, and to criticise him for it.


> One he chooses to make use of an opportunity to save himself, what should
> he have done -- been honest and increased the panic? Or lie?
>
> I could see saying that honesty might have motivated someone to do more
> to escape. I could also see saying that the resulting panic would have
> left /fewer/ people capable of escaping.

I don't see how that would justify actively lying to people and telling
them not to escape.

> In either case, I can't say that beshe'as ma'aseh it was a criminal
> decision to make. It's not even a clear data point against daas Torah.

The point against daas torah is precisely that it was *not* a criminal
decision, it was a mistaken assessment of the situation.  He really thought
Hungary would be safe, and he could leave his chassidim in safety, and yet
two months later the Germans invaded.


-- 
Zev Sero               A citizen may not be required to offer a 'good and
z...@sero.name          substantial reason' why he should be permitted to
                        exercise his rights. The right's existence is all
                        the reason he needs.
                            - Judge Benson E. Legg, Woollard v. Sheridan

 RSN writes:


> >The haredi Sefardi Chief Rabbi of Israel Yitzchak Yosef reiterated his
> >position that women are forbidden to serve in the IDF.
>
> >But Yosef also doubled down by insisting, Yeshiva World
> >reported<
> http://www.theyeshivaworl
> d.com/news/headlines-breaking-stories/218446/rav-yosef-shlita-inductio
> n-of-women-i>nto-the-idf-is-an-isur-doraissa.html
> >,
> >that it actually is an issur d?oraita (prohibition from the Torah itself)
> >for women to serve because women in the IDF must wear men?s clothing ? in
> >this case, carry a weapon, which Yosef rules is a male-only adornment:
>
> I think you are mischaracterising the newspaper article that you are
quoting, but that, if quoted correctly, Rav Yosef is further
mischaracterising the psak fo his father.

You are mischaracterising the article because in fact what it says is that
Rav Yosef referred to:

" a psak from Maran HaGaon HaRav Ovadia Yosef ZT"L appearing in Yechave
Daas permitting a woman to handle a weapon, but not to serve in the IDF."

ie even Rav Y Yosef cannot say that a weapon is forbidden given that his
father ruled explicitly that it was not.

On the other hand, I believe he is mischaracterising his father's psak (in
Shut Yechave Da'at chelek 5 siman 55)

I discussed this psak in
http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol32/v32n013.shtml#13 at some length
(towards the bottom).  The psak is specifically about kindergarten teachers
carrying weapons to protect themselves and the children under their care,
But nowhere does he say that it is forbidden for a woman to go to the IDF.
RYY appears to be trying to make a diyuk from the fact that the permissive
teshuva was about kindergarten teachers, to the prohibiteness of the IDF,
but I think that any honest reading of the psak indicates that it says
nothing of the sort.  And to claim that it is an issur d'orisa, using his
father's teshuva as a basis, can at best be described as polemic, if not
outright distortion.


> >Yosef also said that Jews are obligated to warn female family members
> about
> >serving in the IDF, and must explain to these women that serving in the
> IDF
> >is not a prohibition of rabbinic origin but is instead an issur d?oraita
>
 RYY is obviously free to render his piskei halacha in contradiction to his
father.  But this is very clearly not what his father said. To quote what I
brought in the previous Avodah piece, Rav Ovadiah writes:

And greater than this we find that the gaon Beit Chadash in Yoreh Deah
(siman 182) that he writes that it is forbidden that there should be a klei
gever on a woman etc, that this does not apply except for a thing that is
for noy and kishut [beauty and adornment], and like it is proved from the
words of the Rambam (in perek 12 of Hilchos Avodah Zarah).  And even a thing
that is for noy and kishut isn't forbidden except when a woman dresses in
the dress of a man in order to be like a man, and so for a man who dresses
in the garments of a woman in order to be like a woman, but if they dress in
order to protect themselves because of the sun or because of the cold it is
permitted.  And so rules the Turei Zahav (siman 182 si'if katan 4).  And
even though in the book Yad Katana (page 279b) he goes at length to push
aside the words of the Bach and the Taz, because even though the halacha is
settled in the matter that something that is ano miskaven is permitted, this
is davka when he does a permitted action, and in any event when he does not
intend that he does melecha, but a man who dresses in the garments of a
woman, and a woman who dresses in the garments of a man, even if they do not
intend to be like, behold this is in the category of psik resha, and we rule
(Shabbat 75a and 150a and other places) that Rabbi Shimon admits regarding
psik resha v'lo yamus.  And thus one should not rely on this argument to be
lenient regarding an issur Torah.  But in the Shut of the  Meharam Shik
(Chelek Yoreh Deah siman 173) he establishes the correctness of the words of
the Bach and the Taz, according to the words of the Rashba (Shabbat 133a),
and thus the law is here that which the Torah concludes that it is an
abomination of HaShem your G-d all who do this, that the Torah does not
forbid except when the man intends for a matter of toevah that is to be like
to a woman, and so the opposite.  And so writes the Arigas HaBoshem (Chelek
Yoreh Deah siman 178 letter 4) to establish the words of the Bach and the
Taz that I brought before.   And so it appears in the Shut Avnei Tzedek
(Chelek Yoreh Deah siman 74).  And so agrees the Gaon HaNetziv in his book
Emek HaDavar on the Sifri (Parshas Ki Tetzei).  And see further in this in
the Shut from the Meharsham chelek 2 (siman 243) and in the Shut Yemei Yosef
Yadid medorah basra (Chelek Yoreh Deah siman 6).  And according to this also
in our case that it is not the intention of the teachers in carrying guns in
order to be like to men, but only to protect their lives and the lives of
their students, that are entrusted to them and supervised by them it seems
that the matter is clear that there isn't in this any issue of lo yiye kli
gever al isha. [And so I found just now that HaGaon Rabbi Moshe Feinstein in
Shut Iggeros Moshe Kruch 6  (Chelek Yoreh Deah siman 75) allows to permit
according to his words.]"

There appears to be a view (perhaps strengthened by some haskamot that Rav
Ovadiah Yosef gave) that Rav Yitzchak Yosef rules only in accordance with
his father. But I keep coming across examples where this is not the case.
In some cases it might have been that the Yalkut Yosef was written first,
and then Rav Ovadiah came out with a psak in one of the later volumes of
Yabiat Omer that it turns out is not in accordance with the initial view of
Rav Yitzchak Yosef, but in other cases it seems very difficult to say that.
And it is clear from the Yalkut Yosef that where Rav Yitzchak didn't have
his father's psak to go on, he seems almost inevitably to end up at the
more machmir end of the spectrum (so that any later psak of Rav Ovadiah
undercuts the Yalkut Yosef's moremachmir position)


>
> -------   question:
> >do all agree that possesion and use of  any and all weapons by females is
> >an issur deoraita?
>
> As you can see from the previous postings and above, the question should
rather be asked - who agrees that the use of any and all weapons is an
issur deorita?   And regarding women going out to war, as I quoted higher
up in that piece, the Rambam agrees that women go out to war, if the war is
not a milchemes hareshus.  It is the Radvaz who disagrees.



> >does this include defensive  measures eg  pepper spray? is learning
>  karate
>  >etc also biblically verboten?
>
> Again, see my posting - nobody appears to agree that defensive measures
(where we are concerned with pikuach nefesh) are forbidden, even with bone
fide weapons (such as guns).


> >does this mean that military service is muttar absent weapons?
>
See my discussion regarding the Radvaz and his perhaps.

Kind Regards

Chana
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20140313/cf34ec9f/attachment-0001.htm>

On 13/03/2014 12:24 PM, Rich, Joel wrote:
> Anyone know why during Elul we say selichot early (before davening) but for fasts we say them after shmone esrai?

These are two different kinds of selichos.  The point of the Elul Selichos
is to get up early and pray, "kumi roni balalylah", before it's time for
shacharis.   The fast-day selichos were written to be said during chazaras
hashatz, in the bracha of Selach Lanu, as an expansion of that theme.  As
they grew, and poskim became uncomfortable with the size of the hefsek,
most communities moved them to after chazaras hashatz, just as many did
with the yotzros, etc.  Much the same happened with kinos, which were
originally said during chazaras hashatz, but got moved to afterwards
after they grew so long that the hefsek became an issue.

-- 
Zev Sero               A citizen may not be required to offer a 'good and
z...@sero.name          substantial reason' why he should be permitted to
                        exercise his rights. The right's existence is all
                        the reason he needs.
                            - Judge Benson E. Legg, Woollard v. Sheridan

R' Eli Turkel asked:

> 1) Esther says that she has not be called to the king for 30 days.
> What is the rush why not wait a while longer after all there are
> 11 months to go
> 2) Esther suggests a fast for 3 days that includes Pesach. Again
> why not set the fast for after Pesach since there is plenty of time
> until the following Purim.

Because there ISN'T "plenty of time". This is an emergency! In other words,
Esther is teaching us an important lesson, not to dawdle in such cases.
Such emergencies must be resolved surely and quickly, lest the situation
worsen even further.

On the other hand, there ARE cases where if a sakana exists on Shabbos, but
it is one which can clearly wait until after Shabbos, then the halacha is
to wait. This would seem to support RET's question.

*However* once the emergency has arise, only experts are qualified to say,
"This can wait." Laymen must seek medical attention as soon as possible,
even on Shabbos. Similarly, if a real political or military emergency
arises, laymen must rely on the experts to know if it can wait or not.
Esther certainly qualified in that case, and it was her view that it must
be taken care of immediately, despite the Pesach problems and the arayos
problems.

Actually, Esther initially took a "wait and see" approach regarding the
arayos with Achashverosh. It was Mordechai - who was also a qualified
expert in these things - who convinced her not to wait.

Akiva Miller
____________________________________________________________
Never Eat This Carb
Literally Never! 1 Easy Tip to Increase Fat Burning, Lower Blood Sugar
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/5321e2a4d1f8862a4204ast03vuc

Those of you who wish to thank the Norwegian Cruise Line, their
email is publicrelati...@ncl.com


If you don't know what I'm talking about, here's part of NCL's description
from their press release at
http://www.ncl
.com/nclweb/pressroom/pressRelease.html;jsessionid=Tgs8G2TG175vsFr6WfHf
vLqnpLx5Ct4N!1358307955?storyCode=PR_031114A
(or <http://j.mp/Pxs3WS>):

    The government of Tunisia refused to allow Israeli nationals the
    right to disembark Norwegian Jade in the Port of La Goulette, Tunis
    on Sunday, March 9, 2014. In response to this discriminatory act,
    Norwegian Cruise Line announced today that it has cancelled all
    remaining calls to Tunisia and will not return.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Man is a drop of intellect drowning in a sea
mi...@aishdas.org        of instincts.
http://www.aishdas.org                         - Rav Yisrael Salanter
Fax: (270) 514-1507

 

From: "Prof. Levine" <llev...@stevens.edu>
"

See the  video at http://alephbeta.org/course/lecture/whats-in-a-name-1

There are  3 other videos about Purim on this site.  My 10 year-old
found them  interesting.  YL

 
 
>>>>
 
 
This comes from R' David Fohrman's outstanding book, *The Queen  You 
Thought You Knew:  Unmasking Esther's hidden story* -- which  is based on a very 
close reading of the exact wording of the Megillah,  which echoes similar 
wording in the Chumash.  It's a fascinating book  and is definitely for adults, 
not for ten-year-olds.  But I will add  that even though his readings are 
clever and intriguing, I'm not convinced that  what he finds is "the" truth.
 
--Toby Katz
..
=============




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




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20140313/da618223/attachment-0001.htm>

Click on http://tinyurl.com/p89eqph

YL

> In either case, I can't say that beshe'as ma'aseh it was a criminal
> decision to make. It's not even a clear data point against daas Torah.

The point against daas torah is precisely that it was *not* a criminal
decision, it was a mistaken assessment of the situation.  He really thought
Hungary would be safe, and he could leave his chassidim in safety, and yet
two months later the Germans invaded.

============================
The latest psychological studies pretty much show that we ourselves don't
really know why we make certain decisions, much less why anyone decided
what they did 75 years ago.  Personal life and death decisions seem much
more likely to be made on a gut basis than a carefully thought out ethical
balance.  See for example: Hardwired Behavior by Laurence Tancredi or
Thinking Fast Thinking Slow by Daniel Kahnemann.
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.


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 32, Issue 39
**************************************

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..."


A list of common acronyms is available at
        http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/acronyms.cgi
(They are also visible in the web archive copy of each digest.)