Avodah Mailing List

Volume 32: Number 142

Tue, 14 Oct 2014

• 1. Blowing The Shofar At The End Of Tefillath N`ilah ()
• 2. Re: Blowing The Shofar At The End Of Tefillath N`ilah (Kenneth Miller)
• 3. Ele ezkara (Eli Turkel)
• 4. Women and lulav (Eli Turkel)
• 5. Re: Ele ezkara (Moshe Yehuda Gluck)
• 6. Re: Ele ezkara (Kenneth Miller)
• 7. Re: Ele ezkara (Micha Berger)
• 8. Re: Ele ezkara (Kenneth Miller)
• 9. Tur-sukkot (Rich, Joel)
• 10. re'ach (saul newman)
• 11. Re: Demons in the Talmud (Micha Berger)
• 12. Re: Judaism is not a religion (Micha Berger)
• 13. Re: Judaism is not a religion (Micha Berger)
• 14. Re: Ele ezkara (Eli Turkel)
• 15. Re: time and place (Micha Berger)

> 
> And I would give a similar answer when talking about muqtza or even
> the actual blowing of the shofar at the end of ne'ilah.  Even
> without being definitely after tzeis, I believe it would be mutar
> because it's a derabbanan bein hashemashos (safeiq derabbanan added
> to) letzorekh mitzvah.
> 

What mitzvah?  Only once every 50 years is there a commandment to blow
the shofar on Yom Kippur.  We blow it every year to commemorate the
Jubilee year of ancient, and future, times (parenthetically, the
blowing of the shofar on the Jubilee year was apparently that year's
most salient feature, since the Torah uses the term "yovel" as the
name for the year).  But this commemoration is not, strictly speaking,
a commandment, not even a Rabbinic commandment, since if it were it
would be preceded by a benediction.


                Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter
                6424 N Whipple St
                Chicago IL  60645-4111
                        (1-773)7613784   landline
                        (1-410)9964737   GoogleVoice
                        j...@m5.chicago.il.us
                        http://m5.chicago.il.us

                "The umbrella of the gardener's aunt is in the house"

R' Jay Shachter wrote:

> What mitzvah? Only once every 50 years is there a commandment
> to blow the shofar on Yom Kippur.  We blow it every year to
> commemorate the Jubilee year of ancient, and future, times ...
> But this commemoration is not, strictly speaking, a commandment,
> not even a Rabbinic commandment, since if it were it would be
> preceded by a benediction.

I think the next step might be to look into which other practices (if any)
might override muktzeh, and in particular, what other practices (if any)
might override muktzeh during bein shmashos.

The first that comes to my mind is that we do NOT take the aravos when
Hoshana Rabba falls on Shabbos. And in fact, this avoidance is so important
that the calendar specifically and officially includes a rule to prevent
this situation from coming up. And this is despite the fact that Arava on
Hoshana Rabba is much more of a mitzva than the shofar at Neilah ever was.

On the other hand, it would be on Shabbos itself, rather than "merely" Bein
Hashmashos, so it does not illuminate to topic of this shofar blast very
much. Perhaps it might be helpful to look into various practices which one
might be allowed to directly ask a non-Jew to perform during Bein
Hashmashos.

To repeat RJS's first question:

> What mitzvah?

I would suggest that it is quite legitimate to ask exactly WHAT mitzvah is
being accomplished here. However, the assertion that there is indeed SOME
sort of mitzvah does seem to be a foregone conclusion, at least in the view
of the Mishne Berurah 623:12, who writes: "Even if it is Bein Hashmashos
this is allowed, for it is a Sh'vus L'Tzorech Mitzvah; but if it is Vadai
Yom, it is forbidden to blow [the shofar]."

Akiva Miller
____________________________________________________________
Calling All Book Lovers!
Register your email & access 1000's of free & bargain ebooks daily.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/543587764e5947760b36st03vuc

In the piyut r ishmael cohen gadol held the head of rabban shimon be gamliel
Doesnt that make him tameh which is forbidden
My feeling is not to take a piyut too seriously
Any other answer since poskim take other piyuttim for halacha
Does it depend on the author of the piyut
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20141010/7f820ae1/attachment-0001.htm>

In a shul on yomtov I saw women in the balcony with a lulav
Assuming they said a bracha at home is there any kiyum for a woman to do
the waving at hallel and hoshanos
I can't see any problem but is there a mitzva even for ashkenazim
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20141010/7a6144e6/attachment-0001.htm>

R? ET:

In the piyut r ishmael cohen gadol held the head of rabban shimon be gamliel
Doesnt that make him tameh which is forbidden
My feeling is not to take a piyut too seriously
Any other answer since poskim take other piyuttim for halacha
Does it depend on the author of the piyut

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

 

If they were already in the same room, and R? Yishmael couldn?t leave (they
were captives), then he was already Tamei in the Ohel, and didn?t have the
ability to be poreish from the tumah. 

 

KT,

MYG

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20141011/7cb9b4da/attachment-0001.htm>

R' Eli Turkel asked:

> In the piyut r ishmael cohen gadol held the head of rabban shimon
> be gamliel
> Doesnt that make him tameh which is forbidden

That's only one of the many problems with that piyut. As ArtScroll
(Ashkenaz machzor, pg 586) notes, "while all ten of these righteous men
were murdered by the Romans, their executions did not take place
simultaneously, as described here, nor could they have, since two of the
ten did not even live in the same generation as the other eight."

> My feeling is not to take a piyut too seriously

That's worded pretty harshly. I would phrase it more in terms of not taking
the piyut as a literal historical record. Here's how ArtScroll puts it
(same page): "The liturgical accounts of the martyrdom were  not meant as
historical records, but as dramatic accounts of the story, in order to
evoke feelings of loss and repentance on the part of the congregation."

Similarly, I was struck this year by a comment made by Rabbi Jonathan Sacks
(Chief Rabbi Emeritus of Britain) in his Yom Kippur Machzor (pg 845). He
wrote that "Untaneh Tokef was long believed to have been written in the
eleventh century by Rabbi Amnon of Mainz", although recent discoveries
suggest it to be much older, perhaps even 500 years older. But instead of
totally discrediting the popular story, Rabbi Sacks simply reframes it:
"The story of Rabbi Amnon is less about the composition of the prayer than
about its adoption by the Jewish communities of northern Europe."

For more discussion about Eileh Ezkarah, I suggest reviewing a thread we had seven years ago on this very point, titled "Fables and lies":
http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/getindex.cgi?section=F#FABLES%20AND%20LIES

Akiva Miller
____________________________________________________________
2014 Best Skin Tighteners
A Review List of The Top Performing Skin Tighteners In 2014
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/543a5c81935fe5c817063st02vuc

On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 02:31:17PM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote:
: In the piyut r ishmael cohen gadol held the head of rabban shimon be gamliel
: Doesnt that make him tameh which is forbidden
: My feeling is not to take a piyut too seriously
: Any other answer since poskim take other piyuttim for halacha
:  Does it depend on the author of the piyut

On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 10:47:35AM +0000, Kenneth Miller via Avodah wrote:
: That's only one of the many problems with that piyut. As ArtScroll
: (Ashkenaz machzor, pg 586) notes, "while all ten of these righteous
: men were murdered by the Romans, their executions did not take place
: simultaneously, as described here, nor could they have, since two of
: the ten did not even live in the same generation as the other eight."

This isn't exactly the same question as RET's. (And yes, we did take up
this latter topic far more than once.)

Say a piyut or qinah described a historical event accurately. Does that
mean we can deduce the halakhah from the qinah and the actions of the
people in it? We do not believe in infallible leadership; perhaps the
tensions of the moment and the lack of time to check sources led someone
great to make a non-halachic but still heroic choice? An error, but a
holy error (aveirah lishmah).

Conversely, say the story the piyut tells is mythical or has strong
mythical elements. Would the author want people repeating and emotionally
bonding to an example of contra-halachic behavior? Perhaps we should give
/more/ halachic credance to a mythical piyut or aggadeta, because the
author composing it could take the time to weed misleading conclusions
from his character's actions. And perhaps we should ask questions about
the depiction of R' Yishmael Kohein Gadol in Eileh Ezkera specifically
because we aren't asking about the historicaly RYKG but about the
paytan's choice of depiction, and the presumption that the author wouldn't
needlessly pin an aveirah on RYKG.

A story's historicity and its value as a halachic talking point need
not be related.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             I always give much away,
mi...@aishdas.org        and so gather happiness instead of pleasure.
http://www.aishdas.org           -  Rachel Levin Varnhagen
Fax: (270) 514-1507

> Say a piyut or qinah described a historical event accurately.
> Does that mean we can deduce the halakhah from the qinah and the
> actions of the people in it? We do not believe in infallible
> leadership; perhaps the tensions of the moment and the lack of
> time to check sources led someone great to make a non-halachic
> but still heroic choice? An error, but a holy error (aveirah
> lishmah).

These same questions apply to *any* Maaseh Rav. I am often baffled by
hearing that "So-and-so did such-and-such and therefore the halacha must be
xyz." If they explain their actions, that can be a psak; without an
explanation we're just guessing.

> Conversely, say the story the piyut tells is mythical or has
> strong mythical elements. Would the author want people repeating
> and emotionally bonding to an example of contra-halachic behavior?
> Perhaps we should give /more/ halachic credance to a mythical
> piyut or aggadeta, because the author composing it could take the
> time to weed misleading conclusions from his character's actions.

You can ask an even stronger question: Suppose we know for a fact that the
piyut was written specifically in order to teach Halacha L'Maaseh? How much
halachic credence do we give there?

I would say that even in such a case, one must not blindly accept the psak
of the payyetan, but must consider his reasoning and his authority in the
light of other opinions and authorities. An example of this can be found in
the Yotzer for Shabbos HaGadol, where ArtScroll writes (p 916), "Though it
is authoritative, not all of its points are accepted by the Halachah."

Akiva Miller
____________________________________________________________
Map Your Flood Risk
Find Floodplan Maps, Facts, FAQs, Your Flood Risk Profile and More!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/543a8a1a671e9a1a1d06st03vuc

One often hears the Tur on why sukkot is now and not Nissan. It seems to me
it's often stated as now it's cold so no one would sit in the sukkah and so
it's noticeable that we do.  It struck me as strange since in Israel it's
not particularly cold this time of year.  The actual language of the Tur is
not about cold but about rain.	The Yaavetz questions the rain (based on
the fact one wouldn't sit in the sukkah in the rain) and adds the cold. 
Lulai dmistifina I would have simply understood the Tur as saying it's a
mindset thing - as the rainy season approaches people tend to move inside
in anticipation, whether the rain has come or not (like no straw hats after
Labor day).
GT
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/20141012/2a32f4ef/attachment-0001.htm>

in artscroll's  daled minim sefer [ hebrew notes]  , there is discussion on
the topic of eucalyptus as aravot.  given the leaf shape and stem color ,
it is not clear why it doesnt qualify.   one objection was based on  the
smell , that aravot are supposed to be re'ach  free.

in light of this , i wonder if anyone discusses the smell that aravot
acquire as they blacken , if this smell might likewise be considered a
psul....
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20141012/fa32c7d3/attachment-0001.htm>

On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 01:05:56PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote:
: From http://www.vbm-torah.org/archive/aggada/18aggada.htm
: 
: There is a well-known debate about how to understand talmudic
: references to demons. Some commentators took these gemarot at face
: value while the Rambam denied that demonic beings exist. For
: example...

: How would Rambam interpret our gemara about the danger of even
: numbers? Fortunately, R. Menachem Meiri, a follower of Rambam's
: general school of thought, provides an explanation in his commentary
: on Pesachim. Meiri argues that in talmudic times, the masses were
: very influenced by popular beliefs and superstitions. The sages
: directly combated these beliefs when they were linked to idolatrous
: practices. If the beliefs were simply foolish but not idolatrous,
: the sages would not reject them directly but rather took steps to
: limit their impact.

Except that in talmudic times, demonology wasn't considered a
superstition. It (and astrology) were science. Or more accurately,
philosophy, as the lines between Natural Philosphy and Metaphysics
weren't drawn yet.

Given the history, I would think that the question of chazal believing
in demons is like the question of the Ramban writing about the beri'ah
of hyuli (hyle, ie substance without form), R Chaim Volozhiner writing
about phlogiston (the thing in combustible objects that is released
when they burn) or the Malbim writing about aether (the substance the
universe is filled with that is to light as an ocean is to its waves).

In none of these cases, did the speaker think they were discussing a
religious entity where questions of superstition or idolatry would be
in issue.

Which is why the talmud written in EY, where the Romans ruled and
therefore Greek Natural Philosophy held sway, there are literally just
a couple of mentions of demons in the entire shas.

I therefore would take the question to be what roles demons played in
their worldview, and transvalue the term to refer to whatever plays
the nearest role in today's scientific theories. Such as the Me'iri
saying they're psychologocal entities, and R' Aharon Soloveitchik's
identification of sheidim with germs.

People who read Qabbalah as referring to real metaphysical entities
rather than metaphors would probably note that the Y-mi has less aggadita
altogether, and therefore while the dirth of demons is odd, it is not
odd enough to prove anything. (Or maybe that the Y-mi is less prone
to discuss nistar, although I think mequbalim tend to identify /more/
with the Y-mi than the rest of us, not less.)

Personally I come down on the fence on that one too, as I believe
(whether well founded or not, it's what makes sense to this brain) that
metaphysical entities and metaphors by which the person in question
relates to the non-physical -- including values like chesed, gevurah,
din, fairness, liberty, etc... -- are the same thing.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             When we are no longer able to change a situation
mi...@aishdas.org        -- just think of an incurable disease such as
http://www.aishdas.org   inoperable cancer -- we are challenged to change
Fax: (270) 514-1507      ourselves.      - Victor Frankl (MSfM)

On Sat, Oct 04, 2014 at 09:17:56PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote:
: Please cite the places in his writings where "RSRH tells us the
: exact distinction he means each time" and what these distinctions
: are. YL

Well, you provide a good example yourself:
: The following is from RSRH's Tishrei VI in volume II of the
: Collected writings and I think that again RSRH makes it clear the
: Judaism is not a religion.  (The entire essay may be read at
: http://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/tishrei_VI.pdf)
...
: Not "belief' but "knowledge," not "sentiment" but "determination
: and accomplishment;" these are the energies through which the
: "Jewish religion" becomes manifest. And for that very reason Judaism
: is not a "religion."

And as I noted in the post to which you're replying:
> RSRH didn't talk here about it being G-d's Anthropology whereas religion is
> Man's Theology....
> That's a distinction RSRH makes elsewhere, in his first essay for
> Sivan, sec 2, pg 185 (Ar Prof Levine's site,
> <http://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/sivan_1.pdf>.)}

See pg 185 (3rd page of your PDF), first new paragraph ("The Torah,
however...")

In none of your citations does RSRH make his point using numerous proofs
of different ways in which Judaism isn't a religion. In each case, his
essay's topic is the topc of the proof -- faith vs knowledge or being
from G-d and about man vs being by man and about G-d. As part of the
full essay, it reads more smoothly to assume as I did, that RSRH is
making a specific contrast, and not spilling ink on what boils down to
defining a German word (the one we have rendered "religion").

GCT!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Rescue me from the desire to win every
mi...@aishdas.org        argument and to always be right.
http://www.aishdas.org              - Rav Nassan of Breslav
Fax: (270) 514-1507                   Likutei Tefilos 94:964



Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             When memories exceed dreams,
mi...@aishdas.org        The end is near.
http://www.aishdas.org                   - Rav Moshe Sherer
Fax: (270) 514-1507

On Mon, Oct 06, 2014 at 08:18:13AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote:
: Chassidus also put feeling ahead of action in the beginning amongst
: certain groups,  for example,  davening late.  I also some vestiges
: of this in some of things that some do today.

Vestiges? The notion that chassidus is not studied but lived is
fundamental to what chassidus is.

But I don't think your example works: Tefillah is avodah shebaleiv.
It's an easy case to make that for this particular mitzvah, feeling --
ie kavanah, without which you aren't yotzei -- comes before action.

For that matter, Mussar is pretty much founded on the idea that what
one can change of oneself through knowledge is limited, that you need
add to that a passionate hispa'alus to actually accomplish our goal
in life.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 3:43 PM, Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org> wrote:
> This isn't exactly the same question as RET's. (And yes, we did take up
> this latter topic far more than once.)

> Say a piyut or qinah described a historical event accurately. Does that
> mean we can deduce the halakhah from the qinah and the actions of the
> people in it? We do not believe in infallible leadership; perhaps the
> tensions of the moment...

> Conversely, say the story the piyut tells is mythical or has strong
> mythical elements. Would the author want people repeating and emotionally
> bonding to an example of contra-halachic behavior? ...

I understand Micha's point but nevertheless have two questions

1) A number of gedolim learn from a Tisha Baav kinah that Tisha Baav
includes all tragedies and so one shouldn't have a separate day for the
holocaust. Besides other questions on the shita the question here is
about learning halachot from kinot or piyuttim

2) There are chronicles from the middel ages detailing the attacks of the
first crusades and how Jews martyred themselves to the point of killing
their own children. The halachic validity of such an approach is very
debateable. However, from the historical side many doubt the accuracy of
these chronicles and assume that they were written to memorialize earlier
generations (see Sanctifying the Name of G-d by Jeremy Cohen). So again
the same question arises can one learn halacha from chronicles that may
indeed not give the correct facts.

On Thu, Oct 02, 2014 at 12:40:56PM -0400, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote:
: http://seforim.blogspot.com/2014/10/how-to-read-hasidic-text
: s-quick-guide.html
: How to Read Hasidic Texts: A Quick Guide
: by Ariel Evan Mayse
...
: 4. THE CONTEXT - Now reflect on the text in two ways: First, try to
: read the text on its own terms. How might this message have sounded to
: its original audience, and why might it have been an appropriate teaching
: for that time and place?

: I wonder if this is true as a general rule for mussar as well, let alone halacha.

Mussar moreso than chassidus, I would think.

Mussar is inherently personal; it is based on introspection, finding
out the very custom path from where you are to where you could be,
and which tools would work best for you personally to get from here
to there.

Talmidim in Slabodka told the Alter of the latest "outlandish" (in their
opinion) practice tried in Novhardok. The Alter's only response was,
"Well, does it work?"

Given this attitude, it's hard to draw a line between Mussar and
neo-Mussar; after all, people in this generation, with its focus on
Self-Actualization and its inability to cope with externally imposed
rules and penalties, are going to respond to a very different toolset
than 19th cent or pre-war Lithuanian Jews. As RSWolbe says in his guide
to parenting, today's child needs us to "build and plant" and can't
respond constructively to pruning. The only rod our child can handle
is that of the shepherd, not the disciplinarian. Does this mean RSW was
dealing in a neo-Mussar, or that (as he would put it, and I am echoing)
each generation and culture is going to have its own tendencies?

So, I think it's meaningless to look at a mussar shmuess without context.

However, halakhah may be very different. Halakhah is pretty
much definitionally those things we want to be blanket rules, not
individualized. Yes, there are times when we find that today's reality
is a new umdena, and the effect is what looks like a new din. But by
and large: someone who isn't laid up in pain can't take that motrin,
one can't play an electronic intrument even if it's not tunable, etc...

Whereas mitzvos like "ve'asisa hayashar vehatov" are not spelled out as
itemized behaviors specifically because context dominates and such a
formulation is impossible. At least, that's my understanding of the Ramban
ad loc.

So you need to know context for halakhah too, but the role of context
is far far less for a moreh hora'ah than it is for a moreh derekh.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Never must we think that the Jewish element
mi...@aishdas.org        in us could exist without the human element
http://www.aishdas.org   or vice versa.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                     - Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch


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



_______________________________________________
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.)