Avodah Mailing List

Volume 34: Number 111

Sat, 10 Sep 2016

• 1. Re: R Avraham (Zev Sero)
• 2. Re: R Avraham (Zev Sero)
• 3. Of Elul, L'Dovid, and Golems (Professor L. Levine)
• 4. R Avraham (M Cohen)
• 5. Re: R Avraham (Rich, Joel)
• 6. Re: Of Elul, L'Dovid, and Golems (Micha Berger)
• 7. Re: R Avraham (Akiva Miller)
• 8. Re: shir shel yom (Akiva Miller)
• 9. Re: shir shel yom (Micha Berger)
• 10. Rav Melamed on Metal Pots (Ben Waxman)
• 11. Re: R Avraham (Eli Turkel)
• 12. R Avraham (Eli Turkel)

On 09/09/16 08:30, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote:
> On 9/9/2016 11:48 AM, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote:
>> Thus there are 3 steps in any psak. 1) derive the graph and statistics - this is the job of the expert
>> 2) decide what level of risk is acceptable - this is the job of the rabbi

> How can a rav decide what level of risk is acceptable if he isn't an
> expert in the field?
>
> Meaning, if the doctor says "there is a high probability (or even a
> good probability (does anyone expect a doctor to say 52.3% chance?))
> of the patient suffering consequence X* if he fasts" on what basis is
> a rav going to say "that's acceptable"?

On the contrary, how can expertise in a field give a person *any* insight
into what is acceptable?  What is acceptable is a moral decision, not a
technical one, and technical expertise is neither necessary nor sufficient.

Suppose you live somewhere where etrogim are unavailable, so you consult
a shipping consultant to give you an estimate on how much it would cost to
import an etrog, get it through customs, etc., but instead of giving you a
cost he tells you it will cost "too much".  How can he possibly know how
much *you* would consider too much?



-- 
Zev Sero               Meaningless combinations of words do not acquire
z...@sero.name          meaning merely by appending them to the two other
                        words `God can'.  Nonsense remains nonsense, even
                        when we talk it about God.   -- C S Lewis

On 09/09/16 05:48, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote:
>
> A more controversial point he made is that the total change of
> personality in teshuva is a special chessed of hashem and the regular
> person can't make such a change in a different situation.

Tanya says the same thing: that to become a benoni, i.e. someone who never
sins, and never even consciously considers sinning, is within the power of
every person, but to become a tzadik, i.e. someone who has no yetzer hara,
requires help from Above, which is not always given.


> In referring to the recent controversy in Israel on fixing tracks on
> shabbat he claimed that while it is well known that pikuach nefesh
> over-rides shabbat it is also true that a major monetary loss to the
> community also over-rides shabbat.

Surely not.  It can override "vedaber davar", and even sometimes amira
lenochri, but actual chilul shabbos?!


-- 
Zev Sero               Meaningless combinations of words do not acquire
z...@sero.name          meaning merely by appending them to the two other
                        words `God can'.  Nonsense remains nonsense, even
                        when we talk it about God.   -- C S Lewis

Please see the article at

http://ohr.edu/this_week/insights_into_halacha/4886


on this topic.


Note the postscript to the article which says


Postscript: There are a few communities, including many of Germanic origin,
and the Chassidic communities of Sanz, Bobov, and Kamarna, however, who do
not recite "L'Dovid" during Elul. See Shu"t Divrei Moshe (34), and sefer
Minhagei Kamarna, (printed in the back of Shulchan HaTahor; Elul, 381), as
well as Likutei Eliezer (pg. 5, footnotes 30 - 31). The Kamarna Rebbe of
Yerushalayim, recently told this author that although in his shul "L'Dovid"
is recited, as most of his congregation are not his Chassidim and nearly
everyone's custom is to recite it, nevertheless, he personally does not. It
is also known that the Vilna Gaon did not approve of this addition to
davening (Maaseh Rav 53) as it possibly constitutes 'tircha d'tzibura'. The
general Sefardi minhag as well is not to recite "L'Dovid" specially during
Elul, but many nonetheless recite it all year long as an addition after
Shacharis; see Rav Mordechai Eliyahu's Darchei Halacha glosses to the
Kitzur Shulchan Aruch (128, fo
 otnote 4).


YL
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20160909/57a96e41/attachment-0001.htm>

REL wrote .. major monetary loss to the community also over-rides shabbat

Source ?




=======
Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found.
(Email Guard: 9.1.0.2894, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.22240)
http://free.pctools.com/
=======

On Sep 9, 2016, at 2:27 PM, M Cohen wrote:
> [RET] wrote:
>>  major monetary loss to the community also over-rides shabbat

> Source ?

Perhaps the opinion in the case of the spring where the people upstream
can use the water for the laundry even though the people down river
need it for their lives?

Joel I. Rich F.S.A. Senior Vice President
Sibson Consulting
jr...@sibson.com

Since we're reviving this perenial...

The connection between Elul and "Teshuvah Season" dates back at least to
Vayiqra Rabba 21 which ties "ori", "yish'i" and "ki yitzpeneini besukko"
to RH, YK and Sukkos respectively.

R' Chaim haKohein from Aram Tzova (may they see shalom there bimheirah
beyameinu), a talmid of R' Chaim Vital, may or may not have saying LeDovid
in his siddur, depending on who found the more authentic edition. If
he did, he attributed it to the 13 sheimos found in the pereq, which
correspond to the 13 Middos haRachamim.

A more popular variant was saying it Mon, Thu and Shabbos Minchah
when returning the seifer Torah. Others included it in the longer
Mon and Thu Tachanun.

The custom that actually caught on, of saying LeDavid H' Ori at the end
of davening twice a day from RC Elul until HR is Seifer Chemdas Yamim,
of probably Sabbatean heritage. Still, given the heritage of the basic
idea, does the origin of this particular variant matter so much?

BTW, Granikim don't say it for Shir-shel-Yom reasons. An argument
the kol hamosif goreia.

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             For those with faith there are no questions.
mi...@aishdas.org        For those who lack faith there are no answers.
http://www.aishdas.org                     - Rav Yaakov of Radzimin
Fax: (270) 514-1507

R' Eli Turkel wrote:

> ... in most areas the expert can never give a definitive answer.
> He can only supply statistics or in RMA words he provides a graph
> of the probability of outcomes as a function of either one or
> many variables.
>
> Thus, for example a doctor cannot say whether fasting will harm a
> patient on YK. ...
>
> Thus there are 3 steps in any psak.
> 1) derive the graph and statistics - this is the job of the expert
> 2) decide what level of risk is acceptable - this is the job of
> the rabbi
> 3) deliver a psak based this analysis

R' Ben Waxman asked:

> How can a rav decide what level of risk is acceptable if he isn't
> an expert in the field?

It is clear to me that - according to R Avraham and RET - that the rav's
job is NOT to evaluate whether or not a given situation is dangerous, not
to evaluate the level of that danger. For this, the rav is to rely on the
experts. *After* that point, the rav's job is to understand the issur of
putting oneself (or someone else) into sakana, and to judge whether or not
the halacha forbids or allows (or requires!) the action at hand.

I see nothing new here. The halacha accepts the idea that it is dangerous
for a choleh to fast, and I will concede that the halacha does give broad
categories (such as minor illness, major illness, pregnant, etc) and it
gives general rules for how to rule in any given situation (deathly danger
on YK, far less on a 9 Av Nidcheh).

But when push comes to shove, the bottom line is to ask the doctor. But NOT
for his opinion on whether or not to allow/require the choleh to fast;
that's the rav's job. The rav asks for the doctor's opinion on what will
probably happen if the choleh fasts. To what degree will it harm the
choleh. And then the rav decides whether or not it is serious enough to
warrant eating.

Further, there are many places where the halacha discusses what to do when
doctors disagree about a given case. Maybe you follow the majority of
doctors, maybe you follow the best doctor, maybe you follow the most
cautious doctor. THIS is the rav's job: With a given set of facts,
statistics, and opinions, what does Hashem want me to do?

Okay, having explained my views on Halachic Risk-Taking, I'd like to add
that this idea that "the expert can never give a definitive answer. He can
only supply statistics..." applies in other areas too. Specifically, I have
often used this regarding the definition of death. At most, the doctor can
give statistics like, "We have never seen anyone in this condition
improve," and then it is the rav's job to decide whether or not the neshama
has left the guf. (The fact that one rav might disagree with another rav is
irrelevant. The point here is that it is the doctor's job to supply
statistics, and it is the rav's job to make a determination.)

> A third shiur was given last night by a local rabbi ...
>
> In referring to the recent controversy in Israel on fixing tracks
> on shabbat he claimed that while it is well known that pikuach
> nefesh over-rides shabbat it is also true that a major monetary
> loss to the community also over-rides shabbat. He stressed that
> his opinion was a generality and that its application to any
> specific case would require further investigation.

To my knowledge, "a major monetary loss to the community also over-rides
shabbat", but ONLY FOR D'RABANANS! I shudder to think that someone in the
audience might have heard this comparison between pikuach nefesh and
monetary loss, and come to a terribly wrong conclusion!!!

Akiva Miller
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20160909/bf7aaa62/attachment-0001.htm>

> Anyone know why if the shir shel yom is to remind us of the song
> of the Levites on the daily sacrifice, why do we say it at the
> end of prayer rather than in the karbanot section?

I don't have an answer, but I have a related question which might help shed
light on the question: Why is it that some say this at the end of the
morning prayers (even when that includes Musaf), while others say it
specifically at the end of Shacharis (i.e., before krias haTorah, on days
that have a Musaf)?

Akiva Miller
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20160909/94f05eb6/attachment-0001.htm>

On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 01:06:06PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote:
: Anyone know why if the shir shel yom is to remind us of the song of
: the Levites on the daily sacrifice, why do we say it at the end of prayer
: rather than in the karbanot section?

Look in your Yamim Nora'im machazor. Many have Shir Shel Yom with Shir
haYichud, in the beginning.

Anyway, "we" are saying it in relation to Shemoneh Esrei in its role as a
stand-in for the Tamid, rather than saying it in proximity to mentioning
the Tamid in Seider Qorbanos.

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             One doesn't learn mussar to be a tzaddik,
mi...@aishdas.org        but to become a tzaddik.
http://www.aishdas.org                         - Rav Yisrael Salanter
Fax: (270) 514-1507

http://bit.ly/2bYuDoe

Rav Melamed has ruled that based on scientific studies, metal pots (or 
at least some types) could be used for both milk and meat, without 
kashering them. However, for reasons he gives in the article, he rules 
that kashering is still needed. However, if one did make a mistake and 
cook dairy food in a meat (ben yoma) pot, it (the food) would still be 
kosher.

Rav Lior has ruled this way in the past for stainless steel.

Ben

<<Tanya says the same thing: that to become a benoni, i.e. someone who never
sins, and never even consciously considers sinning, is within the power of
every person, but to become a tzadik, i.e. someone who has no yetzer hara,
requires help from Above, which is not always given. >>

RMA quoted this Tanya and found it very strange that a benoni is someone
who never sinned.
Surely not the usual definition of benoni

In referring to the recent controversy in Israel on fixing tracks on
> shabbat he claimed that while it is well known that pikuach nefesh
> over-rides shabbat it is also true that a major monetary loss to the
> community also over-rides shabbat.
>

<<Surely not.  It can override "vedaber davar", and even sometimes amira
lenochri, but actual chilul shabbos?! >>

Tsafot sanhedrin 26a notes that the gemara allows planting and plowing on
shemiita
because of the taxes (arnona) that needs to be paid. Tosafot gives 2
answers 1) shemiita
nowadays is derabban ( ie a rabbinic violation is allowed for major
financial loss)
2) Finanv=cial oss can lead to actual loss of life if they don't pay the
king his taxes

In practice the suggestion was to use nochrim to do the work on the railroad
infrastrucrure. Rabbi Rosen went so far as to suggest setting up classes to
train
goyim to become experts in various fields what he called "gashas - gimel
shin shin"
for go? shel shabbat (In modern Hebrew a gashash is a tracker frequently
Bedouin)

Some teshuvot Rav Ishon brought
ROY (Yalkut Yosef shabbat 1 remarks 243) - was asked about picking flowers
on shabbat for export - the picking season is extremely short and
skipping shabbat would cause a major financial loss to the Moshav.
He allows it by a Goy (kablan) also based on ysihuv eretz.

Rav Yisraeli (Amud HaYemini 17) discusses the Rambam who allows
a milchemet reshut  to expnad the borders and increase the reputation of
the Jewish kingdom.
R Yisraeli explains that anything that includes the welfare of the entire
community is
considered pikuach nefesh. Thus the income of an individual is not pikuach
nefesh but
if the entire nation will lack income then certainly some of the members
will come to pikuach nefesh
(In Jerusalem as late as in the early 1900s members of the community died
from starvation!! ET).
In general things that for an individual are not pikuach nefesh for the
community it is - he gives additional examples.. He then discusses a
disagreement between the Geonim and
Ramban over a burning coal (gachelet) but claims that even the Ranban who
is machmir disagrees over
that specific case because someone can stand by the burning coal for a
short time to prevent problems.
However, in general even the Ramban allows violating shabbat for many
problems of the community as we
see from the laws of milchemet reshut.

The most fascinating is a teshuva of CI (Iggerot 1-202) .  He actually
allows opening shops on Shabbat
 on the grounds that a great financial loss can lead to pikuach nefesh. He
then warns that one must be very
careful with this heter as this might cause widespread opening of shops in
the galut. Furthermore,
if chillul hashem would result this is yehoreg ve-al yaavot.
Thus with all his advice for moderation the CI is willing to consider in
very limited circumstances opening
shops on shabbat even though the danger to pikuach nefesh is lonly in the
future (i.e. no "lefananu"





On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 7:43 PM, Zev Sero <z...@sero.name> wrote:

> On 09/09/16 05:48, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote:
>
>>
>> A more controversial point he made is that the total change of
>> personality in teshuva is a special chessed of hashem and the regular
>> person can't make such a change in a different situation.
>>
>
> Tanya says the same thing: that to become a benoni, i.e. someone who never
> sins, and never even consciously considers sinning, is within the power of
> every person, but to become a tzadik, i.e. someone who has no yetzer hara,
> requires help from Above, which is not always given.
>
>
> In referring to the recent controversy in Israel on fixing tracks on
>> shabbat he claimed that while it is well known that pikuach nefesh
>> over-rides shabbat it is also true that a major monetary loss to the
>> community also over-rides shabbat.
>>
>
> Surely not.  It can override "vedaber davar", and even sometimes amira
> lenochri, but actual chilul shabbos?!
>
>
> --
> Zev Sero               Meaningless combinations of words do not acquire
> z...@sero.name          meaning merely by appending them to the two other
>                        words `God can'.  Nonsense remains nonsense, even
>                        when we talk it about God.   -- C S Lewis
>



-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20160910/c47cf854/attachment-0001.htm>

<<Meaning, if the doctor says "there is a high probability (or even a good
probability (does anyone expect a doctor to say 52.3% chance?)) of the
patient suffering consequence X* if he fasts" on what basis is a rav
going to say "that's acceptable"? >>

We actually spent time in the shiur debating that point. I pointed out that
Rav Zilberstein
in his shiurim on medical halacha brings several achronim that define
things like
safek muat at 4-5%  rov gadol as 2/3 etc.
RMA disagreed and claimed just because some famous achron gives a number
doesn't mean that one can't have his own definition.

He brought a (unverified) story from the Catham. Some asked CS about the
order of people to say kaddish (assuming only one at a time). He gave some
answer and the questioner remarked that MA disagreed, CS answered, MA made
up his answer so I can make up my answer . (Someone told he actually heard
a similar conversation with RYBS).

RMA answer was that the Rav is certainly as qualified as the doctor to
decide what is the cut-off line. Again his claim is that the doctor can
only present the statistics. At what point is that enough pikuach nefesh to
override YK on its various levels is no longer a medical question.

Similarly the engineer can give a graph of fatalities/serious injuries vs
car speed. How one translates that into a maximum speed limit on the
highway is no longer an engineering question.
Someone has to make a decision what level of fatalities is "acceptable" .
One possibility is that one accepts absolutely no fatalities which
eliminates driving or at best allows a very low speed limit even on a
modern superhighway . There is no magic formula for this RMA only point is
that the traffic engineer is not more qualified than anyone else to make
the decision.

I note that the  Steipler Rav has a letter that if it were up to him he
would not allow anyone to drive except for emergency vehicles and perhaps
public transportation. Any private driving at all would inevitably entail
some fatalities and there was no halachic justification (in his opinion)
for this



-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20160910/e3336257/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.)