Avodah Mailing List

Volume 23: Number 107

Sun, 13 May 2007

• 1. Re: Torah Study vs. other contributions to soCIETY (Samuel Svarc)
• 2. Question on Rashi (SBA)
• 3. Re: fashion models and opera singers (SBA)
• 4. chumrot of sefardim (Gershon Dubin)
• 5. Re: Question on Rashi (Gershon Dubin)
• 6. Re: chumrot of sefardim (was "sweet chalot (Eli Turkel)
• 7. Re: priorities in Talmud Torah (Samuel Svarc)
• 8. Rav Unno (SBA)
• 9. Re: Mechallel Shemitah beFarhesia (Arie Folger)
• 10. Re: Mechallel Shemitah beFarhesia (Micha Berger)
• 11. Re: Question on Rashi (mkopinsky@gmail.com)
• 12. Re: Mechallel Shemitah beFarhesia (kennethgmiller@juno.com)
• 13. Re: Avodah Digest, Vol 23, Issue 106 (Elazar M. Teitz)
• 14. Yizkor second day yom tov in E'Y (T613K@aol.com)
• 15. Ahavat Yisrael (Michael Elzufon)
• 16. Re: Yizkor second day yom tov in E'Y (Zev Sero)

>From: David Riceman <driceman@att.net>
>Subject: Re: [Avodah] Torah Study vs. other contributions to soCIETY
>
>Samuel Svarc wrote:
>> For some reason, you keep on coming back to "prohibited". You're
>flogging the wrong horse :-). The discussion was, what is *preferred*,
learning
>or training for Zaka?
>
>I was responding to RZL's phrase "not so poshut", which in my experience
>is usually related to issur v'heter.  He has subsequently explained it
>as a critique of an argument, not of a conclusion.

No, you've misunderstood. RZL was concluding that training for an event is
not the same as when it's immediate.

>>  The clear answer that Chazal give is learning (check
>> previous posts in this thread for the sources).
>
>This is an old machloketh.  For a nice summary of the side you disagree
>with see Tshuvoth HaRama #7.

Um, I looked at it, and it discusses if it's "prohibited". I fail to see why
you keep on circling back to this point that wasn't in our discussion.

KT,
MSS

From: Gershon Dubin <>
Rashi says in the beginning of Bechukosai, on the pasuk "venasati shalom
ba'aretz"  that shalom is equal to everything, as it says "oseh shalom
uvoreh es hakol" and the publisher (or whoever) marks the source as
Yeshaya 45. Of course, there is no such pasuk. 
>>

Of course?? Hardly anyone caught it...

>> Does Rashi mean to quote birchas kerias shema?

Probably. Ayen Brochos 11b.

SBA

From: Arie Folger >
R'n CL wrote:
> Such a heter must exist however - as there are too many reports of
> gedolim in Germany (not to mention Boston) going to the opera
I wonder, is it indeed documented that RYBS went to opera in Boston, or did 
he
only do that in Germany?
>>

Not being a opera buff, I don't know too much about this.
But MUST an opera always have a female singer?

And was it standard practice for THE gedolim of Germany to attend?
And is there any evidence that others besides RSRH did so -
and whether he did so regularly or just once or twice?
And why would RYBS fave acted differently in Boston to Germany?

SBA 

From: Ken Bloom <kbloom@gmail.com>
 
<<Because the Rema isn't relevant to Sepharadi psak in the same way as he

is to Ashkenazi psak.>>

Not so fast.  I quoted the Rema only because it is more explicit, but the
Mechaber
says the same thing a se'if or two earlier.

Gershon
gershon.dubin@juno.com

On Sat, 12 May 2007 20:11:16 +1000 "SBA" <areivim@sba2.com> writes:

<<Does Rashi mean to quote birchas kerias shema?>>

<< Probably. Ayen Brochos 11b>>

One rov I asked this to told me Rashi would not bring nusach hatefila. 
Another rov told me that Rashi would, and gave me at least two mar'eh
mekomos that other rishonim also do.

My son looked this up in a chumash with 11 peirushim on Rashi.  One that
he told me was, I think, by R"A miBertinoro of Mishna renown, that Rashi
uses the nusach "kemo mikra maleh".

I was interrupted in the middle of that conversation and didn't get any
of the (several) other answers.

Gershon
gershon.dubin@juno.com

ROY would argue that it is not just a chumrah but a halachah and that a
sefardi is not yotzei with a sweet chalah


> I don't understand why the Rama in Yoreh Deah 112:15 is not pertinent
> here.
> It would seem from there that with pas specifically one has an obligation
> to
> avoid ketata even at the cost of sacrificing his personal chumrah.
>
> Gershon
> gershon.dubin@juno.com
>



-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070513/74014d82/attachment-0001.htm 

>From: YBLAU@nyc.rr.com
>Subject: [Avodah] priorities in Talmud Torah
>
>The following was told to me in the name of Rab Baruch Ber ZTL.  There
>is proof from the Talmud Kiddushin 29B that there is a priority given
>in talmud torah based on ability which does not exist in other
>mitzvos.  If a choice is to be made (Rashi there are insufficient funds
>to pay for both) a father should learn himself and not his child.
>However if the child is more capable then the father the child should
>be chosen .  Rashi adds that the father should work to sustain the
>son.  There are ramifications for the ongoing discussion about talmud
>torah.

I want to comment on this, using this post as an example, but it's not
limited to this post. Many people seem to have misunderstood what the
original discussion was about. The question was: Everything being equal,
what is preferred, learning full time or training for Zaka? Clearly, it's
learning that is preferred (sources were previously given).

Many points that were raised, including the above one, that priority is
given on who to teach when resources are limited, are true. They are
deserving of discussion on their own. But they are not relevant to the
original discussion, where the implicit assumption is that we are only
looking at the person now, what should *he* choose. Let's stick to the
topic, or start new threads, but let's not keep on confusing threads.

KT,
MSS

From: "Meir Shinnar" <>
 Issur of kol isha only applies to the problem of saying davar
shebikdusha in its presence (tshuva of Rav Unno, the Rav of
Mannheim before the war, justifiying having choruses of girls
sing - arguing that this was ikkar hadin
>>

I tried to google 'Rabbi Unno', 'Rav Unno' and 'Unno Mannheim' 
but got zero results (as compared to 839 when 
googling "Meir Shinnar"...).

Am I the only person here who has never heard of him before?

And seriously, where CAN one find out more about him?

SBA

On Sunday, 13. May 2007 04:48:40 avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org wrote:
> A mechalel Shabbos befarhesia is equal to a mumar lekhol haTorah
> kulah. However, I do not know of a parallel for a mechallel shemitah
> befarhesia.
>
> Assuming this isn't just a gap in my knowledge, I was wondering why.

I assume that the unwritten argument is that those who speculated on ta'amei 
hamitzvot, the 'Hinukh, for instance, give the necessity to inculcate us with 
the fact the the world was created in six days, to the exclusion of qadmut, 
as a reason for shemittah. Thus, transgressing shemittah should be equated 
with transgressing Shabbat, i.e. qofer bema'aseh vereishit.

This perhaps shows the problem with relying too much on ta'amei hamitzvot. In 
the case of Shabbat, the Torah explicitly makes that link (Shemot 20:11), in 
the case of shemittah, I can't recall such a link.

KT,
-- 
Arie Folger
http://www.ariefolger.googlepages.com

On Sun, May 13, 2007 6:17 am, R Arie Folger wrote:
:> A mechalel Shabbos befarhesia is equal to a mumar lekhol haTorah
:> kulah. However, I do not know of a parallel for a mechallel shemitah
:> befarhesia.
...
: This perhaps shows the problem with relying too much on ta'amei
: hamitzvot. In the case of Shabbat, the Torah explicitly makes that
: link (Shemot 20:11), in the case of shemittah, I can't recall such a
: link.

I fail to see a "problem". I found your reaction akin to someone
raising a question based on a Rav Chaim and getting a reply that his
question shows the problem with relying on lomdus. Lehefech, the
questioner was looking for more lomdus!

What the question shows is that there is a more complex relationship
between shemittah and ma'aseh bereishis than that of Shabbos.
Something for the Chinukh's or RSRH's successors to work with to
produce a more subtle, nuanced and meaningful understanding of
shemittah.


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

On 5/11/07, Gershon Dubin <gershon.dubin@juno.com> wrote:
> Rashi says in the beginning of Bechukosai, on the pasuk "venasati shalom
> ba'aretz"  that shalom is equal to everything, as it says "oseh shalom
> uvoreh es hakol" and the publisher (or whoever) marks the source as
> Yeshaya 45. Of course, there is no such pasuk.  Does Rashi mean to quote
> birchas kerias shema?
>
> Gershon
> gershon.dubin@juno.com
In my chumash (small blue mikraos gedolos), it has this corrected as
(uvorei es hakol) [uvorei ra].  (I can't remember if the correction is in
the text of Rashi or in the Sifsei Chachamim.)  The SC explains that
uvorei es hakol means/is a euphemism for borei ra.

Michael

R' Micha Berger asked:
> A mechalel Shabbos befarhesia is equal to a mumar lekhol
> haTorah kulah. However, I do not know of a parallel for
> a mechallel shemitah befarhesia. Assuming this isn't just
> a gap in my knowledge, I was wondering why. Is it simply
> that the money issue is so great that it's too high of a
> threashold to set? Or is there something fundamentally
> different about what shemiras Shabbos attests to compared
> to shemiras shemittah?

I do not understand the question.

Before you can ask specifically about shemittah, first you have to 
ask, "What is it about Shabbos, which makes a mechalel Shabbos 
befarhesia equal to a mumar lekhol haTorah kulah, whereas a mechalel 
Yom Tov befarhesia and an ochel neveilos befarhesia are *not* equal 
to a mumar lekhol haTorah kulah?" (Or, perhaps in my ignorance, 
perople in those categories *are* equal to a mumar lekhol haTorah 
kulah.)

Then, once you understand what makes Shabbos different (which, BTW, I 
don't, though I could offer a few guesses), you can ask what makes 
Shemittah different.

So: My guess is that you already have some idea about what makes 
Shabbos special in this regard, and it's not obvious to you how 
shemittah is different; include that when you follow-up to this 
thread, and then we can analyze the differences.

Akiva Miller

     The comment was made about a gadol baTorah that "if I could give 
him my place on line (something that is not always halachically 
proper) I would do it."

     If "giving my place" means letting him in before you, though 
there are others behind you, when is it ever halachically proper, 
since it is chav la'acheirim? And if "giving my place" means 
exchanging places, giving up your place and going to the end of the 
line in his place, when is it ever halachically improper?

EMT

 

What do you chevra think about this?  I'm going to be in Israel for  Shavuos 
IY"H and am wondering what to do about Yizkor.   Do I say it  on the second 
day at a chu'l  minyan in a yeshiva near my mother's  house?  If so, what do I 
do the first day when they say Yizkor in the  regular shul -- leave, stay but 
don't say Yizkor, say Yizkor and then say it  again the next day?  Or do I have 
to daven both days in the chu'l  minyan?
 

--Toby  Katz
=============



************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070513/93d17874/attachment.html 

Reb' Shoshana L. Boublil wrote:
> Actually, Rav Kook quotes the Chafetz Chaim in his book "Ahavat Chesed". 
> The Chafetz Chaim quotes Rabbi Yehonatan Vohliner: The Din that it is 
> allowed or a Mitzva to hate people that don't follow the straight path, is 
> only after you reproved (Hochichuhu), but it is forbidden to hate him until 
> all the options have been tried.  And, as the Tana'im have already informed 
> us "Temeihani Im Yesh BaDor HaZeh SheYode'ah LeHochi'ach" (Arachin 16b) 
> Mimeila, it is forbidden (!!!!-SLB) to hate anyone.
>
> Rav Kook continues that nowadays, we are not supposed to use the educational 
> tools of Sin'a at all!
>
>   
Apparently the Chofetz Chaim distinguished between a wayward individual 
and a group of deviant people who are undermining the community.

The Mishna Berura in Biur Halacha (1:1), bottom of page 8, "However if a 
person is in a place where there are apikorsim who rebel against the 
Torah and want to make some decree concerning public matters and because 
of that will cause the people to transgress G-d's will. You should 
approach them peacefully but if they won't listen ... it is a mitzva to 
hate them and to fight them and to nullify their desgns in any way 
possible. We know that Dovid (Tehilim 139:21-2) said 'I hate those who 
hate You and I will fight against those who rebel against You and I hate 
them with pure hatred.' "

Daniel Eidensohn

[MJE] What is the distinction?  Both cases have either a heter or a hiyuv to hate and both condition this on first approaching them peacefully.

T613K@aol.com wrote:
> What do you chevra think about this?  I'm going to be in Israel for 
> Shavuos IY"H

Mazal tov.

> and am wondering what to do about Yizkor.   Do I say it on 
> the second day at a chu'l  minyan in a yeshiva near my mother's house?

This is, of course, assuming that you are keeping two days.  OK.

  
> If so, what do I do the first day when they say Yizkor in the regular 
> shul -- leave, stay but don't say Yizkor, say Yizkor and then say it 
> again the next day?  Or do I have to daven both days in the chu'l minyan?

I don't understand the whole minhag EY regarding Yizkor.  What is the
point of saying yizkor when they don't read "ish kematenat yado"?
And in EY they *never* read it, even on Shemini Atzeret.

Then again, there's a lot I don't understand about the way the chu"l
minhagim of keriat hatorah were transplanted to EY, which I presume
happened when Jews came back after the crusaders.  For instance, *why*
don't they read Aser Te'aser on Shemini Atzeret, which is its zeman,
and then read Vezot Haberacha either a) immediately after, b) at mincha
of the same day, or c) on the following Shabbat together with Bereshit?
The last two suggestions would also prevent the strange transition from
the exhilaration of Simchat Torah to the solemnity of Geshem and Yizkor.

Also the extraordinarily long reading of the first day of chol hamoed
Pesach, which is of course the reading for the second day of Pesach
in chu"l.  Why not cut it down a bit, to make it similar in length to
the other chol hamoed readings?

-- 
Zev Sero               Something has gone seriously awry with this Court's
zev@sero.name          interpretation of the Constitution.
                       	                          - Clarence Thomas


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 23, Issue 107
***************************************

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..."