Avodah Mailing List

Volume 32: Number 83

Sun, 11 May 2014

• 1. Re: The O Therapist and the Suicidally Depressed Gay Client? (Micha Berger)
• 2. Re: silk-screened sifrei torah (STAM) and megillot (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer)
• 3. Re: silk-screened sifrei torah (STAM) and megillot (Zev Sero)
• 4. Re: The O Therapist and the Suicidally Depressed Gay Client? (Zev Sero)
• 5. Re: The O Therapist and the Suicidally Depressed Gay Client? (Arie Folger)
• 6. Re: silk-screened sifrei torah (STAM) and megillot (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer)
• 7. Re: silk-screened sifrei torah (STAM) and megillot (Zev Sero)
• 8. Re: Women wearing Tefillin (David Cohen)
• 9. summer halachot (Eli Turkel)
• 10. Re: Women wearing Tefillin (menucha)
• 11. Re: The O Therapist and the Suicidally Depressed Gay Client? (Kenneth Miller)
• 12. Re: The O Therapist and the Suicidally Depressed Gay Client? (Moshe Y. Gluck)
• 13. Re: silk-screened sifrei torah (STAM) and megillot (Moshe Y. Gluck)
• 14. Re: Women wearing Tefillin (David Cohen)
• 15. Re: The O Therapist and the Suicidally Depressed Gay Client? (Arie Folger)

On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 09:46:58PM -0500, Lisa Liel via Avodah wrote:
: On 5/9/2014 6:41 PM, Harry Maryles wrote:
:> Being a Cheresh does not mean being only a deaf-mute. It is a
:> mental disorder.

: That may be what it means now.  It isn't what it always meant.

This thread is the first I ever heard of translating it that way.

The gemara (Nidah 13b, Chagiga 2b, Gittin 71a) explicitly distinguishes
between the cheireish hamedaber ve'eino shomei'ah, and the cheireish
that the tana'im speak of, who can do neither. They also contrast to
the ileim, who can hear but not speak.

Seems kind of open-and-shut to me.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 26th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        3 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Hod sheb'Netzach: When is domination or taking
Fax: (270) 514-1507         control just a way of abandoning one's self?

In netilas yadayim the mitzvah is the spilling. That is done with its 
form of koach gavra. In writing the mitzvah is the application of ink to 
paper. That is done with its form of koach gavra. The mitzvos are 
different, but each is performed with appropriate human intervention.

Continuing your line of logic, OTOH, we could define writing as spilling 
ink from a nib...

KT,
YGB

On 05/10/2014 09:51 PM, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote:
> On 9/05/2014 4:27 PM, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer via Avodah wrote:
>> Rabbi Abadi designed the process specifically to address the issue of
>> shefichah. They don't spill the ink on the sink screen. They apply it
>> with koach gavra.
>
> But koach gavra isn't the issue, is it?  Spilling is also koach gavra,
> after all.  That's what we use lechatchila for netilas yodayim, after 
> all!
>

On 10/05/2014 11:45 PM, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer wrote:
> In netilas yadayim the mitzvah is the spilling. That is done with its
> form of koach gavra. In writing the mitzvah is the application of ink
> to paper. That is done with its form of koach gavra.

What do you mean by "its form of koach gavra"?  Koach gavra is one thing,
regardless of context.  Either it's there or it isn't.  In netilas yodayim
we are careful to ensure that the water comes mikoach gavra and not in some
other way.  When you open the tap, we observe that the first rush of water
is coming  mikoach gavra, but the following water is not.  With a get the
ink is certainly being spilled mikoach gavra.  The problem isn't that it's
the wrong form of koach gavra, it's that koach gavra is irrelevant.  There
is no requirement of koach gavra.  There's a requirement for kesivah, and
that is what's lacking.




-- 
Zev Sero             Sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable
z...@sero.name        from malice.
                                                          - Eric Raymond

On 10/05/2014 10:46 PM, Lisa Liel via Avodah wrote:
> On 5/9/2014 6:41 PM, Harry Maryles wrote:
>> Being a Cheresh does not mean being only a deaf-mute. It is a mental disorder.

> That may be what it means now.  It isn't what it always meant.

It certainly isn't what it meant to Chazal.  They take it for granted that a
person who was perfectly normal and then lost his speech and hearing, but
communicates fluently in writing and is fully compos mentis, is a cheresh.

So how did its meaning change, and by whose authority?


-- 
Zev Sero             Sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable
z...@sero.name        from malice.
                                                          - Eric Raymond

RAM et al are wondering whether the occurrence of adultery could really be
so great as to produce as many issurim as the reconciliation of a couple of
boalei niddot.

Well, those who have been wondering are obviously living happily sheltered
lives. However,  adultery is not that uncommon in a society that doesn't
consider a new romantic relationship with a third party to even be adultery
once ,,the marriage is over.''

And one night stands are not particularly uncommon either. From pastoral
experience I can tell you that short term relationships (a couple of weeks
or months) are similarly common enough, and are not just the unique purview
of men or of the childless. Kids really do wake up one morning to find out
a fellow they never knew before is having breakfast with them having just
exited mum's room in pyjamas.

Add to all that the fact that couples that have been together for a while
have conjugal relations less often than newlyweds (or rather "newlyloves"),
and you can readily see that Rav Moshe Sternbuch, though he lives in Meah
Shearim, is not ignorant of the (sad) realities of the decadent Western
culture.

Kol tuv,
--
mit freundlichen Gr??en,
with kind regards,
Arie Folger

visit my blog at http://ariefolger.wordpress.com/
sent from my mobile device
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20140511/9ec61a9e/attachment-0001.htm>

On 05/10/2014 11:52 PM, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote:
>                                                The problem isn't that it's
> the wrong form of koach gavra, it's that koach gavra is irrelevant.  There
> is no requirement of koach gavra.  There's a requirement for kesivah, and
> that is what's lacking.

Kesiva is not necessarily lacking. You should read up on Rabbi Abadi's 
process.

KT,
YGB

On 11/05/2014 9:39 AM, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer wrote:
> Kesiva is not necessarily lacking. You should read up on Rabbi Abadi's process.

Well, obviously it depends on the definition of kesivah.  But my point is that
the objection to his process is *not*, as you assert, the lack of koach gavra,
but the lack of kesivah.  Kesivah, the objectors would say, means making the
strokes, and in R Abadi's process one doesn't.   And their basis would be in
the clear distinction made between kesivah and sheficha.   Both are actions,
but they're not the same action, and in this case the Torah requires a specific
action, kesivah, which spilling just isn't.

Your counter-case is based on the assumption that the objection is the lack
of koach gavra, or rather (on further inspection) the lack of the "right kind"
of KG.  To which you counter that the KG used is in fact of the right kind
after all.  But what is your basis for assuming that there are different kinds
of KG in the first place?   I've never heard of such a thing, and it doesn't
seem logical to me.  AFAIK, KG means exactly what the words say, and *of course*
it's present in R Abadi's process, but it's also just as much present in the
example from gittin which we rule is passul.   

-- 
Zev Sero             Sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable
z...@sero.name        from malice.
                                                          - Eric Raymond

menucha wrote:
>>  We cannot drop Halachot because they make us "unpleasant", especially
when
>> we are talking about the fasts of the Churban who are supposed to make
us mournful.

But in a time when there is no Beis haMikdash but also no persecution,
these fasts are dependent on whether the community wants to fast or not.

The custom of your community and mine, which is reflected in the Shulchan
Aruch, is that healthy women who are not pregnant or nursing do fast.  But
if an entire community (and I would think that most chassidic communities
meet the definition of "community" in a stronger sense than many others do)
have a custom according to which women, as a collective, did not accept to
fast on these days, I would think that to be legitimate.

-- D.C.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20140511/90f4da14/attachment-0001.htm>

<<Unless needed for a medical condition, sunglasses may not be worn on
Shabbos outside of an Eiruv.>>

Does everyone agree to this? It would seem to depend on whether people
remove sunglasses which might depend on where you live.

In any case it is clear that regular glasses that change tint to become
like sunglasses are allowed on shabbat since one does not remove them. In
addition the poskim say that there is no problem of "tzovea"

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20140511/7f6abadf/attachment-0001.htm>

David Cohen via Avodah wrote:

>
>
> But in a time when there is no Beis haMikdash but also no persecution, 
> these fasts are dependent on whether the community wants to fast or not.
>
No persecution.  Are you saying that Chassidishe women fasted until the 
mid twentieth century?That sounds radically Zionist!

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20140511/8932327e/attachment-0001.htm>

Rabbi Arie Folger wrote:

> RAM et al are wondering whether the occurrence of adultery
> could really be so great as to produce as many issurim as the
> reconciliation of a couple of boalei niddot.
>
> Well, those who have been wondering are obviously living
> happily sheltered lives. ...

Alas, I must admit that I feared to expect that this would be the response.

If my views have been skewed by my admittedly sheltered life, then my hope
is that the views of Rabbis Sternbuch and Folger were skewed in the other
direction, by the things that a community leader has the misfortune to know
of. And if so, then my prayer is that the truth is somewhere in the middle,
and not quite as bad as they see it.

Akiva Miller

"You and I have something in common: We are both intimately familiar with evil." -- Chassidic Rebbe to Homicide Detective in the film "A Stranger Among Us"
____________________________________________________________
The #1 Worst Carb Ever?
Click to Learn #1 Carb that Kills Your Blood Sugar (Don't Eat This!)
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/536fd556d9a5455566129st01vuc

R? AF:

Add to all that the fact that couples that have been together for a while
have conjugal relations less often than newlyweds (or rather "newlyloves"),
and you can readily see that Rav Moshe Sternbuch, though he lives in Meah
Shearim, is not ignorant of the (sad) realities of the decadent Western
culture.

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

Not disagreeing about your summation of the situation, but I wouldn?t blame
it on Western culture; I think it?s human nature: Ain Apitropus L?arayos. I
would suspect that R? MS?s knowledge is coming from that, more than the
evaluation of a particular culture. Also, I?d like to point out that we
really need someone like R? AF (or other practicing or retired Rabbonim on
list) to tell us what is going on. From the little interaction I?ve been
having with people over the last few years in my job, I?ve come to see that
there is so much more going on beneath the surface (not necessarily in this
particular area) that most people are not aware of.

 

KT,
MYG

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20140511/30f569e4/attachment-0001.htm>

On 11/05/2014 9:39 AM, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer wrote:
> Kesiva is not necessarily lacking. You should read up on Rabbi Abadi's
process.

R' ZS:
Well, obviously it depends on the definition of kesivah.  But my point is
that the objection to his process is *not*, as you assert, the lack of koach
gavra, but the lack of kesivah.  Kesivah, the objectors would say, means
making the
strokes, and in R Abadi's process one doesn't.  <SNIP>
------------------------------ 

MYG:
I don't think anyone requires "strokes" for kesivah. If you "dot" the kulmus
on the klaf over and over until a letter is formed, I think that is
perfectly kosher. 

R' ZS:
Both are actions,
but they're not the same action, and in this case the Torah requires a
specific action, kesivah, which spilling just isn't.

Your counter-case is based on the assumption that the objection is the lack
of koach gavra, or rather (on further inspection) the lack of the "right
kind"
of KG.  To which you counter that the KG used is in fact of the right kind
after all.  But what is your basis for assuming that there are different
kinds
of KG in the first place?   I've never heard of such a thing, and it doesn't
seem logical to me.  AFAIK, KG means exactly what the words say, and *of
course* it's present in R Abadi's process, but it's also just as much
present in the
example from gittin which we rule is passul.   
---------------------------------------


Correct me if I'm misunderstanding, but it seems to me that you think that
spilling ink on the silkscreen is what writes the letters. It isn't; in R'
Abadi's process the ink is too thick and the silk too fine for the ink to
penetrate the silkscreen. The only way for the ink to leave a mark on the
klaf is for someone to push the ink through the "holes" (the unblocked areas
of the silk). I think that there are other objections to this process
(notably the lack of necessity for sirtut), but I don't think this is one of
them.

KT,
MYG

menucha wrote:
>> No persecution.  Are you saying that Chassidishe women fasted until the
mid twentieth century?That sounds radically Zionist!

Perhaps "persecution" (which certainly did exist) was not the best way to
translate "shemad" (or "gezeiras hamalchus").  According to the Ran in the
name of the Ramban, if that condition were met, then everyone would have to
keep all 5 inuyim, and to fast from the previous evening, just like Tishah
b'Av.  That was certainly not the custom, throughout Jewish history, of
 those who were not chassidishe women and did fast  (though I once read of
individuals -- outside of the danger zone themselves, of course -- who did
so during the Holocaust).  Presumably, they either maintained that the
halacha is not like the Ran/Ramban, or they felt that their conditions were
not on the level of shemad.

-- D.C.


On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 9:31 PM, menucha <m...@inter.net.il> wrote:

>  David Cohen via Avodah wrote:
>
>
>
>  But in a time when there is no Beis haMikdash but also no persecution,
> these fasts are dependent on whether the community wants to fast or not.
>
>   No persecution.  Are you saying that Chassidishe women fasted until the
> mid twentieth century?That sounds radically Zionist!
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20140511/296e718d/attachment.htm>

On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 9:59 PM, Moshe Y. Gluck <mgl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Also, I?d like to point out that we really need someone like R? AF (or
> other practicing or retired Rabbonim on list) to tell us what is going on.
> From the little interaction I?ve been having with people over the last few
> years in my job, I?ve come to see that there is so much more going on
> beneath the surface (not necessarily in this particular area) that most
> people are not aware of.


There is a lot going on beneath the surface. Especially, but even more
sadly not limited to non frum circles. People show up at functions with
their still married boy- or girlfriend. People who were makpid to marry
Jewish and have their kids marry Jewish may suddenly get into a liason with
a non Jew later in life (the one that really killed me was "the boyfriend
of my grandmother"). People never bother about a get until years later,
when they have been in a solid relationship for years, people do not bother
to go through the civil divorce until long after they are in another stable
relationship. Divorce is being dragged on because the other spouse has
someone, etc. etc. etc.

Needless to say that far less people bother about yichud.

As RMYG said, ein apotropos le'arayot. There are also young people from
frum families who miraculously have a child nine or less months after
getting married, though that is rare (and in one case I am related to, from
Lakewood, it was actually legit, with the child being born prematurely and
staying for weeks in an incubator. Over a decade later I can tell you that
BH she is just fine).

All the above is for heterosexuals. Homosexuals are a whole different
parsha, and though I have known homosexuals for years and they have come
for rabbinic consultations, I have never quite been asked to act as a
rabbinic relationship therapist for a homosexual couple.

Nonetheless, I would not dare providing guesstimates for the occurrence of
any form of adultery and extramarital affair. However, the following is
telling: https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080425133413AAo0xJz

> Q: Is infidelity a common occurrence in marriage?
> A2: No. It's fairly common in divorce, though...

Other answer:

> Speaking as a couples therapist, yes. 40-60% of men, and 20% of women
cheat.

Hashem yishmerenu!
-- 
Arie Folger,
Recent blog posts on http://ariefolger.wordpress.com/

* When we Sell Our Chametz, We Mean It (humor)

* Are Freedom of Religion and Human Rights in Conflict?

* Warum gingen unsere Vorfahren ins ?gyptische Exil? (Audio-Schiur)

* Warum heilt G?tt nicht die Amputierte

* Culture, a Foundation for Torah?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20140511/5c30ae9a/attachment.htm>

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



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


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


**************************************

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.)