Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 233

Thursday, December 30 1999

• academic freedom
• Re: Batlanim
• scholarship and involvement
• Re: Academic scholarship by Orthodox Jews
• Intermarraige rate (Orthodoxy and return of the land)
• Re: Academic scholarship by Orthodox Jews
• Re: Academic scholarship by Orthodox Jews
• Slap in the Face
• Re: Rav Dessler and gedolim
• re: Rav Dessler's Shita on Kollel
• Re: sephardi minhag
• re: sephardi minhag
• Re: sephardi minhag
• Re: Bes Din (2)
• Re: Academic scholarship By Orthodox Jews
• AJ Hecshel
• Re: Avodah V4 #232
• Re: academic freedom
• Re: Slap in the Face
• Re: scholarship and involvement
• Re[2]: sephardi minhag

> 
> While I have my own pet "derech" on this, I would be fascinated in learning from
> the spectrum of Avodah Chaveirim.
> 
> With all due sincerity, how does one combine or synthesize or harmonize emuno 
> and shmiras Torah umitzvos with academic freedom and scientifically based 
> inquiry?
> 
There was an extensive debate on this issue in the early volumes of
the Torah UMadda Journal between Rabbi Parness and Berger/Kaplan

Eli Turkel

Moshe Rudner <mosherudner@hotmail.com> writes in v2n122:
:                                                             Nope. The Rambam 
: wrote in the Hakdama that henceforth one need only 2 sforim - this one and 
: Tanach. He even states explicitly in another letter that he is certain that 
: after his death his mission will be accomplished and the Mishna Torah will 
: replace the Gemara.

I don't think you have that correct. The Rambam (Hil Talmud Torah) describes
the three chalakim of learning as: Mikrah is Tanach, Mishnah is halachah
pesukah and Gemara is "lehavin davar mitoch davar". As is clear from the name,
the Mishneh Torah was NOT intended to provide Gemara; any conclusion-only
text couldn't qualify anyway.

Chakiros and pilpul are kinds of gemarah anyway.

:                                                                      The way 
: that Yeshivot learn today is Avodah Perech.

I would have called it *Ameilus* baTorah.

:                                              Secondly, there's no end in 
: sight. Just keep learning day in and day out. Until when? Forever, there's 
: no end.

"Lo alecha hamlachah ligmor, vilo ata ben chorin livatel mimenah."

: Does anybody care to know Torah anymore? Nowadays it's all an intellectual 
: exercise.

This part bothers me too. We don't spend enough time on devarim hanichnasim
laleiv. I often attend shiurim with exciting explanations of the machlokes
between the Rambam and the Ra'avad -- but how often does it actually impact
how good of a Jew I am?

I'm not claiming that cerebral learning isn't kiyum hamitzvah, but I think
the pendulum needs to swing back a bit.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 30-Dec-99: Chamishi, Shemos
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 91b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         

Melech Press writes

<< It is to assert, however, that the conclusions of scholars are
not separable from their intellectual positions >>

I completely agree with Melech but would go one step further. What he
writes is true not only in the secular world but in the Torah world.
In most yeshivot it is stressed that a perush or psak of a gadol is
a purely intellectual exercise and is independent of the personality
of the gadol.
I claim that on the contrary a psak of a gadol is very much affected
by a priori opinions be they intellectual or emotional.

One simple example:
There is a question whether one can take a sefer Torah out from shul
so that the community can dance with the Torah.
This is especially a question in Israel where many communities have
hakafot shniot that involve the entire town not just the religious.
I have seen 2 teshuvot on the issue.

#1 It is prohibited becuase it is not kavod haTorah to take a Torah
into the streets and especially to be handled by people who do not
live Torah lives.

#2 It is a mitzva since it is a great kavod haTorah for the entire
populace to dance with the Torah and it may bring outsiders to the Torah.

Thus, both teshuvot agree that the halachic principle is kavod haTorah.
How one translates this into a practical act depends on ones attitude
towards the non and less religious.

Eli Turkel

In a message dated 12/30/99 4:46:06 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
shlomog@mehish.co.il writes:

<< 
 "vast numbers of Jews loyal to Jewish Law feel that many of
 the rabbinic restrictions tend to impede rather than to inspire greater
 joy and love of God . . . excessive regard for the hedge may spell ruin
 for the vineyard."
 
 That, my friend, reads like classical conservative Judaism.  >>

Is it forbidden to feel that way or to act on it?

Kol Tuv,
Joel Rich

>>80% of Jews are non-observant -- they have a >50% intermarriage rate -- any
you think that's thriving?<<
    It is now well known that due to calculation errors in the original 1990 
UJA study, the actual rate was closer to 30%. Still a churban, but let's keep 
our numbers accurate.   
    David I. Cohen

In a message dated 12/30/99 3:46:06 AM US Central Standard Time, 
shlomog@mehish.co.il writes:

<< "vast numbers of Jews loyal to Jewish Law feel that many of
 the rabbinic restrictions tend to impede rather than to inspire greater
 joy and love of God . . . excessive regard for the hedge may spell ruin
 for the vineyard."
 
 That, my friend, reads like classical conservative Judaism.  (Or was
 he just throwing a bone to his employer?)
  >>

I don't think R'Heschel's comment of the way some Jews feel about rabbinic 
restrictions smacks of conservative Judaism. Conservative rabbis (unlike most 
of their congregants) like rules almost as much as Orthodox ones do -- 
nowadays they've attempted to recreate a virtual Sanhedrin with the 
Rabbinical Assembly's committee system. 

R'Heschel's observation on the way many Jews respond to halachic requirements 
is just that -- an observation. Do you think he is wrong? Again, personally 
he was very observant. Obviously he didn't allow his conduct, or his thought, 
to be ruled by a plebiscite.

David Finch

In a message dated 12/30/99 8:06:18 AM US Central Standard Time, 
Joelirich@aol.com writes:

<< << 
  "vast numbers of Jews loyal to Jewish Law feel that many of
  the rabbinic restrictions tend to impede rather than to inspire greater
  joy and love of God . . . excessive regard for the hedge may spell ruin
  for the vineyard."
  
  That, my friend, reads like classical conservative Judaism.  >>
 
 Is it forbidden to feel that way or to act on it?
  >>

Yes. R'Rich puts it much better than I did.

David Finch

I know Micha has requested we refrain from the EY issue, but I could not
resist noting my utter dismay at the Chilul Hashem nora v'ayom staring at me
from the pages of The New York Times this morning leynei kol ha'amim: Baruch
Goldstein's matzeiva, adorned with: "ZTVKL"! and "Neki Kapa'im u'Bar Levav"!

I will refrain from commenting on the impression the accompanying essay
makes.

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL 60659
http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila    ygb@aishdas.org

YU is a Litvishe yeshiva in the mold of Volozhin the same as any other (at
least, RIETS is, not the other branches). It is not the equivalent of RYY
Reines' Lida.

The derech in YU is precisely that of Rav Dessler and the CI, only with
formal limudei chol (as opposed to the informal at Volozhin and Slabodka)
thrown in.

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL 60659
http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila    ygb@aishdas.org


----- Original Message -----
From: Eli Turkel <turkel@math.tau.ac.il>
To: <avodah@aishdas.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 30, 1999 6:48 AM
Subject: Rav Dessler and gedolim


> First the shita of Frankfurt is based on the Chatam Sofer (at least
> from the days of R. Breuer Sr) that stressed yeshiva as a way of
> making well rounded ballei batim. As part of this shita the yeshiva
> in Pressburg always had some secular studies including German, which
> is usually overlooked in the discussion about Voloshin. Nevertheless,
> the yeshiva in Pressburg did produce gedolim.
>
> While Carl has shown that this is the shita of Rav Dessler, Chazon Ish
> and others I have grave doubts that it actually works.
> In terms of roshei yeshivot I suspect that YU has produces as many as
> any American yeshiva. Certainly R. Schacter and R. Lichtenstein are
> equal to other graduates of American yeshivot.
> In Israel there is no real equivalent so it is hard to contrast.
>

R' Carl Sherer wrote that Rav Dessler <<< argues that better someone
should go off the derech than that we should miss the chance to produce a
talmid chacham. >>>

I asked <<< Can someone explain to me why this does not consititute an
issur d'oraisa of Michshol? Why does anyone think that "the chance to
produce a talmid chacham" is important enough to risk pushing someone
"off the derech"? >>>

R' Harry Maryles misunderstood my comment, thinking that I was accusing a
specific Yeshiva of being a michshol. Let me clarify my point.

It is certainly not the *desire* of ANY yeshiva to actually produce
people who are not Shomrei Mitzvos. Being human, it is a possibility that
all yeshivos must deal with, but that does not constitute a michshol,
else ALL yeshivos would have to close down. "Chachamim hizharu
v'divreichem" (Avos 1:11 and Bartenura) but not that they can't teach at
all.

Rather, my complaint was against the cavalier *attitude* that we must
produce chachamim at all costs, even at the expense of pushing someone
off the derech. If there were indeed a mitzvah to produce chachamim, I
could understand that attitude. But there is no such mitzvah, and I
cannot understand how anyone could even entertain the idea that <<<
better someone should go off the derech than that we should miss the
chance to produce a talmid chacham. >>> Lo aleinu!

I would like to think that R' Carl has misunderstood Rav Dessler, but I
have read too much here and elsewhere which corroborates it.
Nevertheless, I thank R' Carl for giving the specific citation (Michtav
Me'Eliyahu, vol 3, pp 355 ff)  and I hope to see it for myself over the
weekend.

   (By the way, I'd like to retract my question as to whether putting
this attitude into action would be a full-fledged d'Oraisa of Michshol,
or "merely" a d'Rabanan of Mesayea, since one can go off the derech in
other ways. My impression is that Mesayea applies when the other person
is already intending to do an aveira, and the question is whether or not
I can help him to do it. That is not the case when an innocent goes to an
overly intensive yeshiva, which is so dead-set on producing chachamim
that it does not mind producing a few off-the-derech types as well. This
(it seems to me) is quite literally a Michshol -- a stumbling-block
before the blind.)

Akiva Miller

.
________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

Eli Turkel wrote:


> The article also claims that frequently R. Yosef is not successful
> in his battle against minhag (based on on sephardi poskim).


This is true. 


---sam

Eli Turkel wrote: << I just
finished an article that claimed the opposite. That R. Ovadiah
Yosef has been battling for Sephardim to pasken like the Mechaber
even when it is against Ben Ish Chai or other established minhag.
The article also claims that frequently R. Yosef is not successful
in his battle against minhag (based on on sephardi poskim).  >>

A friend at work whose family is from Tunisia and is a recent 
baal tshuva informs me that Rav Ovadia also has been trying to
reduce the influence of the Kabbala and Zohar on the halacha.
(Perhaps this is what you meant in your comment above ??)
In particular, the prayer book published under his aegis eliminates
a lot of the the kabbalistic influences, including the vowelization (in
its various permutations) of the shem adnut.

Kol tuv,
Shlomo Godick   

Shlomo Godick wrote:


> A friend at work whose family is from Tunisia and is a recent 
> baal tshuva informs me that Rav Ovadia also has been trying to
> reduce the influence of the Kabbala and Zohar on the halacha.
> (Perhaps this is what you meant in your comment above ??)


I don't think that's what he's attempting. He's trying to re-unify
normative sefardi halacha. The Ben Ish Hai, Hida, R' Haiim Palaggi, and
others would pasken like the Zohar over Maran sometimes, and R' Ovadiah
would like to have the communities who accepted those decisions to return
to the S"A.

Probably entirely needless to mention that there is resistance.

Strong resistance, especially in the Iraqi and Syrian communities.

Just yesterday, I picked up a sefer by R' Ovadiah on the Ben Ish Hai 
titled (I think) Halacha Olam. I'm curious to start learning it. Should be
very interesting.



> In particular, the prayer book published under his aegis eliminates
> a lot of the the kabbalistic influences, including the vowelization (in
> its various permutations) of the shem adnut.


That would probably be Ohr VaDerech. A simple siddur for everyone. There
are other siddurim published under his aegis as well which do include the
various vowelizations. 



---sam

----- Original Message -----
From: Gershon Dubin <gershon.dubin@juno.com>
To: <avodah@aishdas.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 1999 9:51 PM
Subject: Bes Din (2)


> Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 09:42:28 -0500
> From: "Daniel B. Schwartz" <SCHWARTZESQ@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
> Subject: Re: Bes Din
>
> << A Contrere amaci caro (to the contrary my dear friend).>>
>
> I am pleased to see that this discussion remains on a friendly basis.
> <snip>

    Of course it is. Why would it be otherwise?

>
> <<The rest of us merely have a general obligation to be honest and shun
> dishonesty; but there is no specific injunction for doctors or lawyers
> like there is for dayanim.  That is the difference.  The world expects
> more from the judiciary and confidence in it is only as good as the worst
> judge.>>
>
> I don't believe that this is true.  A bad judge is a bad judge,  and it
> is not fair to the judiciary to lose confidence on the basis of one
> member.

    Then we agree to disagree.  I believe, based on my personal experience
that people view the judiciary, Jewish and secular, as corporeal
representations of truth, integrity and justice (it's the lawyers who are
cynical, not the laity).  When that body disappoints by dint of moral
turpitude, it creates a aunschungkampf, a crisis of outlook.

.
>
> <<Indeed a catch 22.  But, this list does not exist in a vacume.  We are
> all members of the Jewish community and with a small bit of independant
> research can come to know a great deal about this issue.>>
>
> You should pardon my saying so, but fat chance.  Messieurs Schwartz and
> Klagbrun, with first hand knowledge and hard facts about the situation,
> refuse to do more than wave their hands and state that there are no
> honest dayanim.

    I have not said that there are no honest dayanim.  In fact I know of at
least one honest mesader Gittin in New York (albeit he is not a vert
powerful force in the rabbinic world).  There are alsoe certain "private"
Batei Din, which are reliable, but they limit their jurisdiction to members
of their kehilot only and do not take cases from outside.  What I have said
is that on the whole, Beth Din is a morally defunct institution.

> <<Would Zavlo botei dinim circumvent this?>>
>
> The Novominsker Rebbe,  several years ago, spoke at an Agudah convention
> about batei din and peoples' conceptions of them.  If I remember
> correctly,  he seemed to indicate that zablo batei din were a large part
> of the problem.
>
> Gershon
>

Re: <<I think that there are distinctions between ... Kellner ... who are 
academics and not yirei shamaim>>

I'm not mekabel.

From what I read in his book Must A Jew Believe Anything?, which I have 
disagreed with strongly on this list and in private e-mails, it is clear 
that Kellner is a yerei shamayim.

Be very careful before and if you respond to this.

[Sorry for the kana'us from someone who has unfortunately not been careful 
enough with his own words.  But I was reviewing Chafetz Chaim on my commute 
today and, as R. Yisrael Salanter pointed out, the best way to becoming 
more careful in practice is to study those halachos.]

this is a tough slippery slope

Onthe one hand do we have a right to JUDGE  R. Heschel

OTOH, don't we looko for haskomos to see the "vailidity" of an author?  So how 
cano we discern between a scholarly book and a sefer w/o knowing the author's 
background etc.

Rich Wolpoe

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________

>>According the late Dayan Yosef Apfel, who knew R' Heschel in Berlin, he 
was
>>already associating with non-Orthodox Jews.

associating?! is that justification for speculating on the deeds of one no 
longer here to defend himself, were this a group to demand accountability of 
anyone?! Why do we seem to toss away the Shmiras HaLashon every time someone 
whips out the old frumometer?

> which is reflected in these posts. Afterall, the Rambam, The Gra and RYBS 
> were not afraid of the intellectual trends of their respective tekufos. 
> Yehuda Halevi and Rav Elchanan Wassserman HaShem Yimkom damo reflect the the 
> opposite side of this equation. Where would list members place the Ramban?

1. There is nothing in the Kuzari that indicates a fear of intellectual
challenge. If the conviction that a conception of G-d based upon human
culture alone is inadequate puts one in a certain category, then R.
Soloveitchik and the Kuzari belong together. If knowledge of what culture
has to offer, and judicious confrontation with the culture define another
category, then the Rav and the Kuzari also belong together.

2. At the same time, the modernist effort to claim the Gra as an
"intellectually open" personality are exaggerated, to say the least. His
acquaintance with intellectual currents of his time was fairly limited,
despite a few general remarks in favor of knowledge.

Are those early volumes still available?

Rich Wolpoe


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________

> While I have my own pet "derech" on this, I would be fascinated in learning fr
om
> the spectrum of Avodah Chaveirim.
> 
> With all due sincerity, how does one combine or synthesize or harmonize emuno 
> and shmiras Torah umitzvos with academic freedom and scientifically based 
> inquiry?
> 
There was an extensive debate on this issue in the early volumes of 
the Torah UMadda Journal between Rabbi Parness and Berger/Kaplan

Eli Turkel

FWIW: That's how come I prefer the term Olov haShalom becaus it makes NO 
judgement re: the niftar only a bakosho that he rest in peace.  IOW it tends not
to arouse a "backlash"

Rich Wolpoe 



______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________

I know Micha has requested we refrain from the EY issue, but I could not 
resist noting my utter dismay at the Chilul Hashem nora v'ayom staring at me 
from the pages of The New York Times this morning leynei kol ha'amim: Baruch 
Goldstein's matzeiva, adorned with: "ZTVKL"! and "Neki Kapa'im u'Bar Levav"!

I will refrain from commenting on the impression the accompanying essay 
makes.

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL 60659 
http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila    ygb@aishdas.org

In 10th grade at Ner Yisroel I learned the nature of a true slippery slope re: 
sevoro.

It had to do with a gezeiro.

The talmid said, "We are more meikle by eishes ish since the person is playing 
with fire he will be nizhar, while with a pnuyo wea re more concerned".  (this 
is simlari to being machmir on muktzo on YT over shabbos

The rebbe liked the sevoro but said lemaase we hold the other way, that we are 
machmir by eishes ish due to the severiy of the issur and meikel by pnuyo...

IOW, the same set of circumstances can be spinned by soldi sevor into 2 diferent
directions.  (btw, the talmid in question was imho a near-illuy & the sone of a 
talmid chochom).

q: So how can we EVER arrive at objetive psak when personal netiyos are part of 
teh human condition?

a: by consensus.  Lehvadil Like judging an olympic event lheavdil, we igonore 
the extreme opinions on either side and factor in all the middle-of-the-read 
opinions <smile>

Illustration:

Tzeis at Sof Shabbos:

The most extreme shito within RT is about 90+ minutes -toss that out

The most lenienct Gro shita could be 18-30 minutes -.  toss that out.

You wind up with shitos fo 42/45/50 minutes etc.  And MOST of the velt holds 
this and is only machmir to wait longer due to teh chumros of shabbos, etc.

Rich Wolpoe








______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________

Melech Press writes

<< It is to assert, however, that the conclusions of scholars are 
not separable from their intellectual positions >>

I completely agree with Melech but would go one step further. What he 
writes is true not only in the secular world but in the Torah world. 
In most yeshivot it is stressed that a perush or psak of a gadol is
a purely intellectual exercise and is independent of the personality 
of the gadol.
I claim that on the contrary a psak of a gadol is very much affected 
by a priori opinions be they intellectual or emotional.

<snip>

Eli Turkel

q: how did it come about that later Sefardic poskim followed the Zohar more than
the Bet Yoseif himself who was a "chaver" of The Arizal?

Was this a progressive thing in which more and more Zohar was incorporated over 
the years into Minhag?

Was it that the BY weighted the Zohar less into his psak because he valued the 
decisions of the "Big 3"?

Rich Wolpoe



______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: sephardi minhag 



I don't think that's what he's attempting. He's trying to re-unify 
normative sefardi halacha. The Ben Ish Hai, Hida, R' Haiim Palaggi, and 
others would pasken like the Zohar over Maran sometimes, and R' Ovadiah 
would like to have the communities who accepted those decisions to return 
to the S"A.



---sam

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


[ Distributed to the Avodah mailing list, digested version.                   ]
[ To post: mail to avodah@aishdas.org                                         ]
[ For back issues: mail "get avodah-digest vXX.nYYY" to majordomo@aishdas.org ]
[ or, the archive can be found at http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/              ]
[ For general requests: mail the word "help" to majordomo@aishdas.org         ]