Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 434

Tuesday, March 14 2000

• Re: Chazeres vs. Maror
• Re: Yisachar-Zevulin
• RW, was re: Avodah V4 #431
• Re: Machtzis HaShekel
• The Holocaust
• Re: RW, was re: Avodah V4 #431
• Re: Clinton's eulogy for YR
• Re: RW, was re: Avodah V4 #431
• Re: Avodah V4 #430
• Re: RW, was re: Avodah V4 #431
• Re: Avodah V4 #431
• Re: Aliya and Moshiach
• Re: Yisachar-Zevulin
• Re: Avodah V4 #432
• Holocaust
• Re: Avodah V4 #432
• holocaust
• Holocaust
• Avos Marrying Sisters (was Re: Aliya and Moshiach)
• RW and Historical Revisionism?

"Carl M. Sherer" wrote:


> FWIW my shver's minhag (which I have adopted) is to use the
> "maror" (consisting of chunks of horseradish) for Korech, and to
> use ground horseradish (chazeres) for maror.


Interesting. We do exactly the opposite, as brought in the Ben Ish Hai,
Yalkut Yosef and others.

I checked last night, and found no answers to the original question, so
I wasn't going to post. But I find it fascinating to compare and
contrast minhagim.


---sam

On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 09:26:59AM -0500, Markowitz, Chaim wrote:
: 	And how about someone who appreciates the value of learning but is
: not financially capable of being a Zevulun? Would you say that his schar is
: less than a Zevulun even though they learn with the same hislahavus?

No. But we aren't talking about non-Zevuluns, even Zevulun wannabes. The point
was only that a Zevulun, one that desires to do it and does it, will thereby
become a talmud chacham.

The Zevulun wannabe is laudable, there is sechar in accordance with his
regret at lacking the finances to support a Yissachar. However, the dynamic
of a Zevulun wannabe, but is not the same dynamic as someone who actually
experiences giving up money. Not necessarily lesser, depending upon the depths
of the retzonos in each. But it's a different thing. I therefore think your
comparison is that of apples and oranges.

-mi

PS: If you want your emails to be found by people hunting the archive,
take the time to change the subject line from "Re: Avodah 4 # 486" to "'Re: '
whatever it is you're replying to".

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for  7-Mar-00: Shelishi, Pekudei
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Rosh-Hashanah 5b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         

Indeed, my father is strongly of the opinion that I should have the fact
that I played Pee Wee Hockey in 6th grade on my resume - despite the fact
that my record consists solely and entirely of one two minute penalty for
hooking.

----- Original Message -----
From: Aaron Berger <devaar@earthlink.net>
To: <avodah@aishdas.org>
Cc: Marc Rosenbloom <judahmoshe@aol.com>; Martin Esral
<mesral@mindspring.com>; dspetner <dspetner@shul.net>; Jeff Ballabon Aol
<RBallabon@aol.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2000 12:04 AM
Subject: RE: Avodah V4 #431


> Regarding the below post ...
>
> "But it seems to me that the RW is always looking for away to separate
> itself from the rest of the Jewish world."
>
> ... I haven't noticed that the Redwings have separated from the rest of
the
> Jewish world. The fact that they are even considered to be PART of the
> heimishe velt is preponderous. In fact, most of the goyim (shkotzim) in
> hockey are not even aware that jews love to play floor hockey in yeshiva
> dorms and dining rooms. And this is not limited to heimeshe (our type) of
> jews, Many YU types also play hockey, though they call it Hockey exegesis
> (known by the heimeshe as exe-yoshke).
>
> Happy Purim -
> Aaron
>
>
>
>

In a message dated 3/13/00 4:47:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
micha@aishdas.org writes:

> But an American 50 cent peice doesn't have 50 cents worth of metal in it.
>  (As was a half-shekel.) It isn't even backed by 50 cents worth of metal in
>  Fort Knox. American currency's only value is in consensus and faith in the
>  gov't that coins it.
>  
>  It can therefore be argued that a modern US coin isn't a matbei'ah as far
>  as halachah defines the notion.
>  
Where does it say that Lhalacha (not discussing now Pidyoin HAben or KIdushin 
with less then Shava Pruta which can also be argued), a Matbei'ah must have 
the metalic value? what is needed for Machtzis (according to the opinion that 
we do not need the value of 1/2 Shekel) is an official coin of the country 
one lives in, that has the "name" Machtzis on it, 

Kol Tuv

Yitzchok Zirkind

> Gil.Student@citicorp.com wrote:
> 
> Yet throughout history Jews have appointed other days to commemorate
> tragedies. 
> The most prominent in pre-Holocaust history was Tach VeTat but there were
> many 
> others.  I think R. Schwab and R. Hutner made the right call but I don't 
> understand their reasoning.
> 
	Were the days commemorating Tach V'tat instituted for world wide
Jewry or just for those areas who were affected? Maybe we don't set up
special days for all of Klal Yisroel-just for those communities affected.
For the rest of Klal Yisroel we remember the tragedies on Tisha B'Av. 

In a message dated 3/14/00 9:44:17 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu writes:

> Indeed, my father is strongly of the opinion that I should have the fact
>  that I played Pee Wee Hockey in 6th grade on my resume - despite the fact
>  that my record consists solely and entirely of one two minute penalty for
>  hooking.
>  
noted as such :-) 

Marbin Bsimcha

Yitzchok Zirkind

I <<If I recall correctly, of all the Maspidim,  Clinton was the only one to 
say a Dvar Torah on that occasion... >>
  
Torah Bagoyim Al Taamin

Kol Tuv

Yitzchok Zirkind

I seem to recall that you were often the starting goalie.



"Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer" wrote:

> Indeed, my father is strongly of the opinion that I should have the fact
> that I played Pee Wee Hockey in 6th grade on my resume - despite the fact
> that my record consists solely and entirely of one two minute penalty for
> hooking.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Aaron Berger <devaar@earthlink.net>
> To: <avodah@aishdas.org>
> Cc: Marc Rosenbloom <judahmoshe@aol.com>; Martin Esral
> <mesral@mindspring.com>; dspetner <dspetner@shul.net>; Jeff Ballabon Aol
> <RBallabon@aol.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2000 12:04 AM
> Subject: RE: Avodah V4 #431
>
> > Regarding the below post ...
> >
> > "But it seems to me that the RW is always looking for away to separate
> > itself from the rest of the Jewish world."
> >
> > ... I haven't noticed that the Redwings have separated from the rest of
> the
> > Jewish world. The fact that they are even considered to be PART of the
> > heimishe velt is preponderous. In fact, most of the goyim (shkotzim) in
> > hockey are not even aware that jews love to play floor hockey in yeshiva
> > dorms and dining rooms. And this is not limited to heimeshe (our type) of
> > jews, Many YU types also play hockey, though they call it Hockey exegesis
> > (known by the heimeshe as exe-yoshke).
> >
> > Happy Purim -
> > Aaron
> >
> >
> >
> >

In a message dated 3/13/00 11:48:22 AM Central Standard Time, 
owner-avodah@aishdas.org writes:

<< Subject: The Holocaust and the Pope (and the RW)
 
 In this morning's Chicago Tribune there was a rather
 lengthy article about the Pope's apology for all
 atrocities committed by the Christian (now Catholic)
 Church to all people's over the course of it's 2000
 year history.  This included admissions by the Pope
 that not only were Christian LAY people involved but
 even officials of the church including many Pope's. 
 He stopped short of accepting direct culpability on
 the part of Pius of complicity in the deaths of Jews
 in the Holocaust.
 
 My question is this: What if anything are we as a
 Torah society to make of this >>
No humor intended, but, with the Catholic Church's record of horrific 
behavior toward Jews, even up to today, one must wonder whether further 
confessions wouldn't be a complete Kefirrah on the part of the Church? 
Vatican ll aside, the Church has never annulled The New Israel Doctrine, also 
called Replacement Theology, and, the Catholic Mission to the Jews, both of 
which are virulently Anti-Jewish in nature. The Catholic Church took a direct 
hit from Southern Baptists recently when they were criticized for not being 
evangelistic enough toward Jews, and, Muslims. Suddenly the Church is quiet. 
Sounds like bad cop-good cop to me. We have to do our thing, immerse 
ourselves in Avodahs Hashem, improve our wanting record of Ahavas Yisroel, 
but, watch our backside when dealing with ANY Christians.

Barry Schwarz

That was street hockey. My record in ice hockey was not as stellar. So I
went into learning instead.

YGB

----- Original Message -----
From: Ari Z. Zivotofsky <azz@lsr.nei.nih.gov>
To: <avodah@aishdas.org>
Cc: Marc Rosenbloom <judahmoshe@aol.com>; Martin Esral
<mesral@mindspring.com>; dspetner <dspetner@shul.net>; Jeff Ballabon Aol
<RBallabon@aol.com>; Barry D. Jacobson <bdj@mit.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2000 8:59 AM
Subject: Re: RW, was re: Avodah V4 #431


>
> I seem to recall that you were often the starting goalie.
>
>

In a message dated 3/14/00 6:05:44 AM US Central Standard Time, 
devaar@earthlink.net writes:

<< .. I haven't noticed that the Redwings have separated from the rest of the
 Jewish world. The fact that they are even considered to be PART of the
 heimishe velt is preponderous. In fact, most of the goyim (shkotzim) in
 hockey are not even aware that jews love to play floor hockey in yeshiva
 dorms and dining rooms. And this is not limited to heimeshe (our type) of
 jews, Many YU types also play hockey, though they call it Hockey exegesis
 (known by the heimeshe as exe-yoshke).
  >>

I must disagree with some of the comments in this post.

First, the Redwings have 91 points in Central Division of the NHL's Western 
Conference. Immediately below them sits the Blackhawks, with only 61 points. 
So the RW have indeed separated themselves from the rest of the world, Jewish 
and otherwise. They're going to the playoffs. For all of our davening, are we?

"Hockey exegesis" is not played by "YU-types," whoever they may be, or by 
other Jews for that matter. Hockey exegesis is played by Catholics who 
believe that while Jesus was ex Maria, hockey came later, and was ex Jesus 
himself. 

Finally, floor hockey is not hockey, just as a Reform conversion ain't a 
conversion. If it ain't on ice, it ain't nice.

David Finch

In a message dated 3/14/00 4:58:04 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il writes:

> We all know that Avraham Avinu sent Eliezer to Charan to find a 
>  wife for Yitzchak because there were no girls available that were 
>  befitting him in Cna'an. And yet, one deah in the Medrash on 
>  "vaHashem beirach es Avraham ba'kol" is that Avraham Avinu had 
>  a daughter whose name was "ba'kol." So why didn't Yitzchak 
>  marry her? Very simple - Yitzchak wanted to marry a girl and not a 
>  Medrash :-) 
>  
>  
Without getting into wether this is a Purim Torah or a Milse D'bdichusa, 
Bpashtus Kayin (and Hevel) had Heter to marry their sisters as Olom Chesed 
Yiboneh, Rashi Vayikra 20:17, what Heter would Yitzchok had, (WRT Shimon and 
Dina, Mforshim give many answers).

Kol Tuv

Yitzchok Zirkind

In a message dated 3/14/00 9:42:03 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
micha@aishdas.org writes:

<< 
 The Zevulun wannabe is laudable, there is sechar in accordance with his
 regret at lacking the finances to support a Yissachar. However, the dynamic
 of a Zevulun wannabe, but is not the same dynamic as someone who actually
 experiences giving up money. >>
I might agree with you if the Y/Z relationship were a full pooling of 
interests (R' Moshe?) where z gives up 1/2 his net worth.  If it's the 
current "here's a check" interpretation then I have a hard time believing 
that one who has an annual income of 5 million dollars and writes a check for 
10,000 really "experiences" more than one who earns 25000 a year and writes a 
check for $100.

Kol tuv
Joel Rich

In a message dated 3/14/00 3:29:03 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
turkel@math.tau.ac.il writes:

> Of course their clothing was not original either. That is not how the 
> rishonim
>  dressed.

Granted! that doesn't take away from the point made.

Kol Tuv

Yitzchok Zirkind

Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2000 04:55:16 IST 
From: "moshe rudner" <mosherudner@hotmail.com> 
Subject: Nissan 

<<I've heard this rationalization before. How about the mourning of
Sfira? 
Does that not begin in Nissan?>>

	I hardly think we can compare a takona made by gedolei olam to mourn the
talmidei Rabbi Akiva,  followed later by memorials to the kedoshim such
as Av Harachamim that we say Shabbos morning because of events which
occurred during sefira,  to "takonos" made by secular Zionists in the
face of opposition from the Torah world. 

<<Also, their way of life was not quite lost. You can buy the same
garments 
and accessories (pocket watches for example) in Meah Shearim or 
Williamsburg. But I can not figure out what is so heilig (holy) about the
way people dressed in the 19th century.>>
	
	The prewar way of life in Europe was distinguished by bekeshes and
pocket watches?   I am sure you did not mean the insult to the kedoshim
(and the survivors!)implied by your remark. 

<<It also opens the door to "never again" ism with its component of
prikas ol.>> 

<<He said that it does not mean that the holocaust will never again
occur. 
Such a belief is ludicrous, we can never know. What it means, and he had 
a good point (even if those who know little about the Holocaust
disagree), 
is that never again will we allow it to happen as passively as we did
last 
time. We will be alert and we will fight back physically if the need 
arises.>>

	What I wrote was "never-again" ism:  the secular religion based upon the
belief that if WE had been there,  we would not have gone like sheep to
the slaughter.  I really don't have the time or energy to get into this, 
but this too is an insult to those who never had a chance to fight back, 
which is evident to anyone who studies the history of the period.   

	I don't say that things cannot be done in advance to protect ourselves
(the one really valid point that Rabbi Kahane always stressed was that it
should be our immediate goal to get ourselves to Eretz Israel rather than
trying to "fight it out" here.) but the belief that the holocaust (there,
 I've said it!) was caused by the lack of will to resist,  and could be
prevented by such will in the future,  is shallow at best.

Gershon
gershon.dubin@juno.com

--- Eli Turkel <turkel@math.tau.ac.il> wrote:
> > 
> > > But I can not figure out what is so heilig
> (holy) about the 
> > >  way people dressed in the 19th century.
> > >  
> > Shloi Shinu Es Lvushom, (see Michlol for Mokor,
> but nonetheless it is a 
> > Loshon Hamrgual).
> > 
> Of course their clothing was not original either.
> That is not how the rishonim
> dressed.
> 
> Eli Turkel
> 

I'm surprised at the ignorance of some of our Chevra.
Doesn't everyone realize that Moshe Rabenu wore a
Shtreimel, Kapote, and Veise Zokin? 
BTW there is a Teshuva that suggests that Moshe did
not wear pants at all, let alone knickers. ( I do
think I once saw a picture of him wearing a bow tie.)

HM
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com

And this was my response to RHM's post:
 
<<I still believe that it belittles the holy survivors to reject what has
become the common 
term for the Holocaust: the Holocaust>> 
 
 I fail to see why the term adopted by the  Holocaust industry has more
feeling attached to it  than one recommended by a godol hador. You're so
used to hearing the word that you cannot entertain an alternative, or
else you reject the term Churban ipso facto it is used in the (hold nose)
RW. 

<<It is not belittleing the event to use that term but it seems to me
belittling it to reject the term and, by inference, rejecting the non
frum survivors.>> 
 
I refuse to accept the implication that using a term other than
"Holocaust" belittles anyone. 
 
<<Has anyone ever spoken to a non religious survivor about his
experience? Try telling him it wasn't a holocaust and that it is more
accurately Churban Europe.>> 
 
The survivors don't give a hoot what you  call it. The experience is so
beyond anyone's comprehension who wasn't actually there that they despair
of describing it. Holocaust or Shoa or  Churban. 
 
<<It is just too easy to say, "Let's get over it".>> 
 
Who, pray tell, said that? We haven't  "gotten over" the churban habayis,
so if we call  the Holocaust a churban it's saying "get over it"?  The
logic of the argument totally escapes me. 
 
<<The best way to do this without detracting even an iota from a Torah
Hashkafa is to just refer to it as the Holocaust and not as Churban
Europe.>> 
 
Nobody ever implied less than full respect for any survivor. I just
simply do not  follow your logic and I believe you are making a mountain
out of less than a molehill. 
 
Gershon 

This post by RHM was accidentally sent privately and deleted by RHM,  so
I am posting it at his request:

--- Gershon Dubin <gershon.dubin@juno.com> wrote: 

> <<They even refuse to refer to the Holocaust as "the 
> Holocaust". It's 
> always Churban Europe. What's the problem? Why not 
> refer to it as 
> everyone else does?>> 
> 
> (My sidebar: who is "they"? and who is everyone 
> else?) 
> 
> This harks back to an article in the Jewish 
> Observer many years ago by 
> Rav Hutner z"l. In one of the few articles he wrote 
> for the JO, he made 
> the point that calling it "Holocaust" or "Shoah" 
> implies that it was a 
> unique phenomenon in Jewish history. Of course it 
> was unique in terms of 
> scale, but in concept not that different from other 
> persecutions in our 
> history. Calling it a name which implies that it 
> was a one time 
> catastrophe removes the obligation of acknowledging 
> that as much as we 
> don't understand, there is a mechanism of mipnei 
> chata'einu galinu 
> me'artzenu in operation here. It also opens the 
> door to "never again" 
> ism with its component of prikas ol. 
> 
> The usage in the "RW" (can we drop this narishkeit 
> already?) stems from 
> that article. You can agree or disagree, but it is 
> done with a 
> cheshbon, based upon this godol's analysis, not as 
> a petty way of being 
> different. 

I realize that the Holcaust is just one of the many 
tragedies that have befallen the Jewish people. 
Obviously there is the Churban Baiyis Rishon and 
Sheni, The Crusades, the Inquisition, Tach Va Tat, 
Numerous Pogroms in all of Europe and the Stain Era. 
But, I believe that in sheer numbers of Jews killed 
for just being Jewish, the Holocaust is the greatest 
of Jewish tragedies and trhe most recent. SO, even if 
there is a reasonable explanation for changing the 
terminology ala R. Hutner, ZTL, even if Churban Europe 
is more precise, I still believe that it belittles the 
holy survivors to reject what has become the common 
term for the Holocaust: the Holocaust. 

Every survivor is holy... Frum and non frum alike. I 
know frum survivors who attend the Shearith HaPleitah 
every year, together with their non religious 
co-survivors. This term is: Holocaust. We all know 
what it means. It is not belittleing the event to use 
that term but it seems to me belittling it to reject 
the term and, by inference, rejecting the non frum 
survivors. Has anyone ever spoken to a non religious 
survivor about his experience? Try telling him it 
wasn't a holocaust and that it is more accurately 
Churban Europe. Even though he can by some be 
described as a Rasha, Tommy Lapid lost 16 members of 
his family. We dare not question his perceptions on 
this issue. He was tested in ways that defy any non 
participant's possibilty of understanding. It is just 
too easy to say, "Let's get over it". 

That being said, however, I do not think we should 
make an Avodah Zarah out of it either. We are a Torah 
nation and not a Holocaust nation. We do need to focus 
more on this. But, at the same time we need to give 
survivors of all stripes more respect than they have 
here to fore received. The best way to do this without 
detracting even an iota from a Torah Hashkafa is to 
just refer to it as the Holocaust and not as Churban 
Europe. 

HM 

On 14 Mar 00, at 10:19, Yzkd@aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 3/14/00 4:58:04 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
> cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il writes:
> 
> > We all know that Avraham Avinu sent Eliezer to Charan to find a 
> >  wife for Yitzchak because there were no girls available that were 
> >  befitting him in Cna'an. And yet, one deah in the Medrash on 
> >  "vaHashem beirach es Avraham ba'kol" is that Avraham Avinu had 
> >  a daughter whose name was "ba'kol." So why didn't Yitzchak 
> >  marry her? Very simple - Yitzchak wanted to marry a girl and not a 
> >  Medrash :-) 
> >  
> >  
> Without getting into wether this is a Purim Torah or a Milse D'bdichusa, 
> Bpashtus Kayin (and Hevel) had Heter to marry their sisters as Olom Chesed 
> Yiboneh, Rashi Vayikra 20:17, what Heter would Yitzchok had, (WRT Shimon and 
> Dina, Mforshim give many answers).

I was thinking about this today also. Can a Ben Noach marry a 
sister? Especially one from a different mother? If so, that would be 
a heter (leaving aside the Ramban and the Meshech Chochma who 
hold that the Avos kept kol haTorah kula at least when they were in 
Eretz Yisrael).

-- Carl


Carl M. Sherer, Adv.
Silber, Schottenfels, Gerber & Sherer
Telephone 972-2-625-7751
Fax 972-2-625-0461
mailto:cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il
mailto:sherer@actcom.co.il

Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for my son,
Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.
Thank you very much.

All of a sudden it struck me that we may all be victims of one of the
greatest historical frauds ever perpertrated by the RW in their incessant
crusade of revisionism.

We have all been inculcated with the idea that the seminal, defining moment
in contemporary Inter-Orthodox relations was the psak of the 11 RW (Right
Wing)Roshei Yeshiva against membership in the NYBR (New York Board of
Rabbis) and the (SCA) Synagogue Council of America in the '50's.

Yet, based on our conversations here this morning, I recalled the
long-suppressed memory that one of the great crises in my father's early
years was the defeat by the RW (Red Wings) of the NYR (New York Rangers) in
the SC (Stanley Cup) finals (was it triple overtime?) sometime in the '50's.
To him, I think, that was a far more seminal and defining moment at the
time!

It is clear that by the simple addition of the initials AB (Aaron Berger?)
RW/NYR/SC was changed to RW/NYBR/SCA.

I ask REC to investigate this matter forthwith and posthaste, so hopefully
by next Tuesday this repugnant manfestation of revisionist tendencies may be
resolved to all of our satisfactions!

YGB

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila    ygb@aishdas.org

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


[ 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         ]