Avodah Mailing List

Volume 21: Number 16

Thu, 30 Nov 2006

• 1. Re: Yaakov kissing Rachel (Micha Berger)
• 2. Walking in front of a mispallel (Sterling Touch)
• 3. test (Micha Berger)
• 4. Re: Walking in front of a mispallel (Moshe Yehuda Gluck)
• 5. Re: Yaakov kissing Rachel (Moshe Yehuda Gluck)
• 6. Re: Yaakov kissing Rachel (Marty Bluke)
• 7. Re: Yaakov kissing Rachel (Micha Berger)
• 8. FWD from Daf-haShavua Vayetze 5767/2006: Was it permitted for Jacob to marry two sisters? (MPoppers@kayescholer.com)
• 9. Where do we fit in? (bdcohen@optonline.net)
• 10. Re: establishing mamzerut (Arie Folger)
• 11. Re: Throwing a Drop (Arie Folger)
• 12. Re: Astrology (Daniel Eidensohn)
• 13. Re: Yaakov kissing Rachel (David Eisen)

On Wed, November 29, 2006 11:47 am, Rich, Joel wrote:
: 	When Yaakov first meets Rachel the first thing he does is kiss
: her and then he cries. What is the significance of this kiss? How was
: Yaakov allowed to do that?

Please ignore my previous answer, which conflated this kiss with Yitzvhaq's
love at first sight of Rivqah. I obviously need more sleep.

Thanks to RZSero for asking, and thanks to him again for sending it in a
format that gave me an excuse to reject his post (10 lines of quote for 1 line
of comment).

Tir'u baTov!
-mi

-- 
Micha Berger             Spirituality is like a bird: if you tighten
micha@aishdas.org        your grip on it, it chokes; slacken your grip,
http://www.aishdas.org   and it flies away.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            - Rav Yisrael Salanter

It seems to me that the Halacha that it is forbidden
to walk in front of someone that is davening Shemona
Esrei has practically been forgotten. 

1.Does anyone know how and when this happened?

2.What is the Limud Zichus for this?

3.In many shuls, Tzedakah is collected during Chazoras
HaShatz and the collector is constantly passing in
front of individuals who are still davening Shemona
Esrei. Why is this permissible? (I actually know of
one Shul that waits until Ashrei to collect.)

4.If a valid Heter cannot be found, would it be
?Lefnei Ever?? to give Tzedakah at that time?

Jeff Kaufman  



 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Want to start your own business?
Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business.
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/r-index

hi

R' Jeff Kaufman:
> It seems to me that the Halacha that it is forbidden
> to walk in front of someone that is davening Shemona
> Esrei has practically been forgotten.
> 
> 1.Does anyone know how and when this happened?
> 
> 2.What is the Limud Zichus for this?

I asked R' David Feinstein a similar question about all the people who talk
Sichas Chullin and Sicha B'teilah in the Bais Ha'K'nesses. (Myself included,
I'm afraid.) He said, "Who says they're doing right?"

KT,
MYG

<I forgot who>
"When Yaakov first meets Rachel the first thing he does is kiss her and then
he cries. What is the significance of this kiss? How was Yaakov allowed to
do that?"??



This reminds me of something that I once said. We don't find anywhere that
Avrohom loved Sorah. We find that Yitzchok loved Rivkah at some point after
they got married. We find that Ya'akov loved Rochel at first sight.

The Chassidim do like Avrohom, the Yeshivish like Yitzchok, and the MO like
Ya'akov. This is to teach us that none of these Mehalchim are better than
the others, and each can be correct. 

(Yes, it's a generalization. I hope I haven't offended anyone - no offense
intended.) 

KT,
MYG

I looked a bit more in the mefarshim and found the following:

The Medrash Rabba writes that Yaakov cried because the people around
suspected him of pritzus for kissing Rachel. The seforno quotes this medrash
and adds that this is the reason why Yaakov right away told Rachel that he
was related to her so that she too wouldn't be choshed him of pritzus. The
Netziv says a similar pshat on his own, he says that Yaakov cried to show
Rachel that the kiss was because she was his relative and was not for
lustful purposes.

Rabbenu B'Chaye offers 2 explanations, either Rachel was under 3 or that he
kissed her hand or forehead and not her lips. This is clearly against the
medrash which states that his action was misinterpreted as one of pritzus.

Of course, in today's Charedi society this could never happen, men and women
mingling and talking at the well??? There would be a mehadrin well with
different times for men and women or 2 separate mehadrin wells 1 for men and
1 for women so that they chas v'shalom shouldn't mingle.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20061130/db0b0878/attachment.html

On Wed, November 29, 2006 11:10 pm, Moshe Yehuda Gluck wrote:
: This reminds me of something that I once said. We don't find anywhere that
: Avrohom loved Sorah. We find that Yitzchok loved Rivkah at some point after
: they got married. We find that Ya'akov loved Rochel at first sight.

I wrote a blog entry on the avos and love. (Actually, it started out as a
devar Torah at my brother's aufruf.) See
<http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2004/12/love-part-ii.shtml>.

I suggest there that each of the avos had a different model of ahavah, which
is reflected in their marriage, their parenting, and their avodas Hashem.

Rashei peraqim as a teaser:

Avraham loved by working together. He and Sarah did outreach in Charan
together. His chessed is the continuing Hashem's work of being a meitiv.

Yitzchaq loved by reaching out to the other. Thus he is the only one about
whom we are told he was metzacheiq his wife. And, this is why Yitzchaq's
characterized by being a qorban and his tefillah.

Ya'aqov was the synthesis of the two, in the Hegelian sense of combining both
to produce something that is neither. He sought to know the other, da'as. Thus
he was the one av who gave each son a matching brother. And his avodah was
focused on yeshivas ohalim.

Avraham and Yitzchaq's parenting, Ya'aqov's marriages, and how Ya'aqov's love
is a synthesis are among the details you'll have to read the blog entry to
see.

Tir'u baTov!
-mi

-- 
Micha Berger             Spirituality is like a bird: if you tighten
micha@aishdas.org        your grip on it, it chokes; slacken your grip,
http://www.aishdas.org   and it flies away.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            - Rav Yisrael Salanter

I thought y'all (and especially RYGB, given not only the content but also
the byline :-)) would enjoy this d'var Torah....
-----


---------------------------------------------------------------------
Rabbi Yitzchok Schochet, Mill Hill Synagogue


Our portion relates how Jacob our forefather
worked for seven years for his uncle Laban, in
exchange for his daughter Rachel?s hand in
marriage. At the final moment, the malevolent
Laban replaced his younger daughter with her
older sister Leah. When Jacob realised he had
been duped he requested Rachel?s hand in
marriage, and this was granted on condition of
another seven years of labour.

One question the commentators grapple with is how
Jacob was allowed to marry two sisters, in
categorical violation of a Biblical precept
forbidding such a union. Granted the Torah had
not been given yet, but our Sages observe that
through prophetic insight our forefathers were
aware of the Torah?s content and adhered to the
many commands contained therein. Jacob?s
behaviour seems to contradict this supposition.

Nachmanides suggests that the forefathers kept
the commandments of the Torah only when they
lived in Israel, whereas Jacob married the
sisters while he was living in Haran. This,
however, would contradict an earlier statement of
Rashi, "with Laban I dwelt and the 613
commandments I kept." A number of other solutions
offered are flawed on various levels.

Based on this premise quoted by Rashi, the
Lubavitcher Rebbe offers a simple yet insightful
explanation. He says that while indeed the Torah
was legally binding after Sinai, it was kept
beforehand by the forefathers only as a
self-imposed stringency. Rachel waited an initial
seven years in order to marry Jacob. Even as she
played a role in the switch with her sister, if
for no reason other than to spare her any
embarrassment, she herself would have remained
devastated at being denied the opportunity of
marrying her soul-mate. For Jacob, this changed
everything. It?s one thing to uphold the
fundamentals of one?s faith when it is formally
required. But as the Torah was not legally
binding, it?s an altogether different matter to
maintain rigidity in self-imposed standards when
at the expense of another, in this case, at Rachel?s expense.

When one wishes to take upon oneself more than
may be required within the realm of Jewish law,
it is certainly commendable. However, where this
is going to be at the material or spiritual
expense of someone else, then not only is not
admirable, it is fundamentally flawed. When
encountering another who is in need of spiritual
help, even where that may take away time from
"perfecting oneself," one must see the truth
which underlies Jacob?s marriage to Rachel. Care
for others overrides concern for self-perfection; it goes beyond G-d?s law.

Rabbi Judah HaNassi taught: "Which is the right
path for a person to choose for himself? What is
harmonious for the one who does it, and
harmonious for one's fellow man." Be as pious as
you want to be, as long as it is only you paying the price.
-----
Shabbas Shalom and all the best from
--Michael Poppers via RIM pager
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20061130/fd9516c9/attachment.htm

"2- The role of natural morality, whether there is a morality beyond and
underlying halakhah"

On the Yeshivat Har Etzion podcasts, kmtt.org , there is a series on Akeidat Yitzchak that deals with this topic. 

David I. Cohen

RMB wrote:
> That is discussing bedi'eved, should we accept it as evidence once we're
> told of test results. OTOH, we have a choice -- why do they need to ever
> have the child tested? The meis who may be an agunah's husband ought to be
> tested, the possible mamzeir and the mother's husband ought not. Thus,
> wouldn't the number of agunos freed well outweigh the number of mamzeirim
> identified?

Some are clearly fearful that once testing is halakhicly recognized, we will 
have a number of mamzerim propping up. A mamzer, BTW, may be worse than 
an 'agunah (though the latter might bring about the former), because the psul 
of mamzerut stigmatizes future generations.

> To return to one of my earlier points: I thought that in the case of
> mamzeirus, we do ignore the "hard to ignore" until we're forced to pay

There is a limit. an event that is 99.9999% accurate cannot be ignored.

Arie Folger

Reb Akiva Blum wrote:
>  >(R' Arie Folger wrote that it was cleaned  twice a year.)
>
> Cleaned twice a year? A source please?
 
I made a mistake. It wasn't cleaned twice a year, but a new one was 
manufactured twice a year. In addition, it would be toveled as needed. Source 
is Tamid 29b and Tos. on Chulkin 90b, where the Mishnah of Tamid 29b is 
quoted.

Kol tuv,

Arie Folger

The comment below is an inaccurate description of the Jewish view of 
astrology. Astrology was and is valued as an accurate source of knowledge - 
even though prohibited in some circumstances. The matter has been much 
discussed in this forum and I assume the postings are still available in 
the archives. I also have a large collection of citations about mazel 
and astrology in my sefer Daas Torah pages 584-595 in the chapter on Mazel.

Daniel Eidensohn

Yisrael Medad wrote:
>
>
>       Anyone want to comment?
>
>
>
>       Apparently it's emetic
>
> A.C. Grayling's analogy of astrology with theology is in principle a 
> forceful one (/LRB/, 2 November <http://v28/n21/letters.html> ). He 
> uses it to suggest that religion, like astrology, consists of 
> 'pre-scientific, rudimentary metaphysics' which reflect 'ancient 
> ignorances'. But in some ways it is also unjust. In ancient Israel 
> astrology was an offence, and was rejected as a source of knowledge, 
> as were all other kinds of divination, magic generally, and 
> consultation of the dead. Ancient Israelites believed (according to 
> Genesis) that the sun, moon and stars were merely 'lights'. Israel's 
> pre-scientific perceptions deserve some credit for their long-range 
> anticipation of what Grayling has lately concluded 'on the basis of 
> rational investigation'.
>
> *Jim Stewart*
> University of Dundee
> http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n23/letters.html
>
>
> -- 
> Yisrael Medad
> Shiloh
> Mobile Post Efraim 44830
> Israel
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Avodah mailing list
> Avodah@lists.aishdas.org
> http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
>   

RMB wrote:
>As for the permissaiblity... If we take the medrash literally that she
turned 3 (rather   >than 15) on her wedding day, Rivqah wasn't
necessarily 3 yet when he kissed her >(unless they were wed on the day
they met). 

R. Moshe Chaim Pollack in his Vaydaber Moshe (New York, 5703) posits
that Yaaqov's kiss was permissible as Yaaqov and Rahel were already
married at that point! He explains that Yaaqov's removal of the boulder
from the well and subsequent watering of Lavan's sheep constituted a
halachic act of kiddushin as these actions were certainly worth at least
a shaveh perutah. Once full kiddushin was performed, Yaaqov's kiss was
fully permissible. [R. Pollack does not mention this, but perhaps the
reason Yaaqov tells the local sheperds "hasku hatzon, u'lkhu r'oo" (or
in other words: SCRAM!) immediately after they point out to him that
Rahel is walking over to them is to enable Yaakov to mityahed with Rahel
in order to consummate the marriage.] R. Pollack further explains why
Yaaqov cried immediately thereafter: Yaaqov was left with a horrible
feeling that he needed to perform kiddushin in such a peculiar manner
and not with proper kesef kiddushin as he arrived in Haran empty-handed,
without even a shaveh perutah to his name! R. Pollack uses this
innovative reading to explain why the second marriage was fictitious
from a purely halachic perspective, and for this reason, Yaaqov demands
that Lavan bring him "his wife" (hava et ishti) as Rachel, indeed is
already his halachic wife for all intensive purposes.

Another interesting "pshat" to explain why Yaaqov was permitted to kiss
Rahel and why he cried immediately thereafter is offered by R. Yaaqov
Chaim Sofer in his Yismah Yisrael (Yerushalayim, 5749). He explains that
Yaaqov Avinu was one of the yehidei segula, and being on such a high
madregia, he knew that he would not succumb to hirhurim, and therefore
there was no halachic prohibition for him to engage in this physical
contact. As a support text, he quotes the Gemara in Ketubot 17a that
records that R. Aha would carry the kalla on his shoulders to dance with
her. When questioned by his students how could this be permissible, he
replied that "if to carrying a woman on your shoulders is tantamount to
carrying a wooden plank, then it is permissible for you as well!" R.
Sofer adds that if this was true for R. Aha, how much so for Yaaqov
Avinu, A"H, who was a pious and holy saint that did not come to hirhur
aveira. Why, then, did Yaaqov cry after the kiss? R. Sofer explains that
based on the Midrash that Elifaz stole all of Yaaqov's money, he was in
a state of mourning, and a person who is in a despondent state is
incapable of hirhurei aveira in matters of intimacy. The Torah therefore
emphasizes that Yaaqov cried in order to cleanse his action in the eyes
of the readers and to explain that his crying revealed his depressed
emotional state, and in turn, the reader will understand that his kiss
was devoid of any sinful thoughts. 

BTW - according to Bereshit Raba, Yaaqov's kiss was indeed of an
intimate nature, and it explains that Yaaqov cried after he noticed that
the locals started to gossip among each other that this strange man from
the west brought with him his licentious practices as these people from
the east (the residents of Haran) have refrained from such wanton
behaviour (gidru atzman min haerva) ever since Dor Hamabul!

Interesting thoughts for the Shabbat table.

For many more insights into Yaakov's kiss, see Prof. Admiel Kosman's
article 'Then Yaaqov Kissed Rahel..." in: Beit-Mikra 149, 5757.

Shabbat Shalom,
David



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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 4, Issue 16
*************************************

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..."