Avodah Mailing List

Volume 25: Number 162

Fri, 02 May 2008

• 1. Why bad things happen to good people (Michael Makovi)
• 2. Abarbanel Haggada with Questions (ZviLampel@theJnet.com)
• 3. Re: size of a kezayit (Yitzhak Grossman)
• 4. Re: Letter of RSRH (T613K@aol.com)
• 5. Re: Hilchos Sefirah (kennethgmiller@juno.com)
• 6. Re: size of a kezayit (Zev Sero)
• 7. Re: Hilchos Sefirah (Ken Bloom)
• 8. Re: Abarbanel Haggada with Questions (Yitzhak Grossman)
• 9. Kaddish (Cantor Wolberg)
• 10. Hilchos sefira (Cantor Wolberg)
• 11. Re: Chametz Gamur (Daniel Israel)
• 12. Re: Kaddish Yasom (Daniel Israel)
• 13. Re: Kaddish Yasom (Daniel Israel)
• 14. Re: Ta'am of eating matzah (Daniel Israel)

(No, I am not using the title of Kushner's book; that was *When* Bad
Things Happen to Good People)

Anyway, I recently read Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan's article "Questions We Ask
God" in Faces and Facets (Moznaim, 1993). There, Rabbi Kaplan reviews
the standard arguments for why evil things occur. He says

1) We can only see Olam haZe, but not Olam haBa. When someone dies,
perhaps he was needed more there than here, or perhaps he completed
his mission on earth. Cf. the fifth answer below

2) Man is part of a society, and part of the historical process. I
will elaborate further on (this second point is what I really want to
focus on in this email).

3) Perhaps a certain innocent person isn't really innocent. Perhaps
the mitzvah we crush under our heel is the most important of all. (I'd
personally add that we say that the good suffer here and are rewarded
later, and for the evil, it is vice versa.)

4) Often, we bring the evil upon ourselves, and have only ourselves to blame.

5) We cannot really know what is good and what is bad. He brings the
story of Rabbi Akiva in the field (the inn had no room) where his
donkey and rooster are eaten and his lamp goes out, and it turns out
that because of this, the bandits didn't find him. Our perspective is
lacking, and we cannot know the full story. Cf. the first answer
above.

What I found particularly novel was the second answer. I have seen
before that often, G-d cannot punish the wicked and reward the good
openly, because this would infringe on free will. G-d has to let
natural processes operate as they will, and sometimes He can only
slowly and stealthily intervene over the course of many years. But
Rabbi Kaplan adds some novel details to this argument, that I have
never seen before. I will quote his words in full, pages 25 bottom to
26 middle in Faces and Facets:

-----


does not exist as an individual, buut rather as a part of his
surrounding society. God controls the historical process in order to
bring mankind to its final good. In this process, individuals may be
caught beneath the wheels of history, and even crushed by them. The
Talmud, in the tractate of Taanit (25a), gives an example of this.
Rabbi Eliezer ben Padat was very poor and sick, and one day he
complained bitterly to God. A heavenly messenger came to him and said,
in the name of God, "Would you have Me recreate the entire world, so
that maybe you would be born into a time of plenty?"

And even the death of the six million - and the untold suffering which
that generation experienced - was it not all in preparation for the
redemption of Israel, and ultimately for the redemption of all
mankind? We are taught that one third of all the suffering ever to be
experienced by the human race will take place in the generation
preceding the redemption. The suffering of the six million surely
brought about the beginnings of the redemption, the return to the land
and to the city of Jerusalem.

-----


what is truly good and what isn't. How could those in the Holocaust
know that the state of Israel would be born from it? (Taking it for
granted that this is a satisfactory answer to the Holocaust.)

So Rabbi Kaplan seems to argue that for the sake of the communal good,
or for the sake of historical continuity, G-d must let things go as
they will.

Rabbi Eliezer Berkovits, in his essay on Job, in Essential Essays,
reprinted from one of his other books (I forget which), concludes that
Sefer Iyov is teaching that sometimes, for the sake of God's
"mishpat", which Rabbi Berkovits says is almost synonymous with
"derech", He must do something that isn't strict justice (i.e. Job
didn't deserve his suffering) for the sake of some overriding need of
the world (G-d's derech, = mishpat).

Mikha'el Makovi

Abarbanel Haggada with Questions I
once learned a Haggada with the Abarbanel's commentary that is
different from what is now easily available. In true Abarbanel style,
it included a slew of "sefeikos" (kushyos) before his commentary
containing the answers. For example, it asks how "avadim hayyinu" answers the four questions, and why the Mah Nishtana does
not include the question of why on this night we drink four cups of
yayyin. 
Has
anyone else seen this Abarbanel Haggada? If so, please tell me the
publishing information or, better yet, send me a copy of the title page
and the page on which this quesitons are printed. 
Thank you,Zvi Lampel





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080501/5ab3d984/attachment-0001.htm 

On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 12:24:52 -0400
Zev Sero <zev@sero.name> wrote:

> Now we do seem to have a dispute about the density of matzah, since
> all the older sources assume it to have approximately the same density
> as water, and the well-attested minhag in EY was to weigh 9 dirhams of
> matzah for a kezayit, explicitly on this assumption that it has the
> same density as water.  If more recent experimental data shows this
> assumption to have been incorrect, then the weight required must be
> adjusted accordingly.

Note that Ralbag (cited by Kessef Mishneh, Temidin U'Mussafin 5:9)
asserts that the density of Matzah is at most slightly less, and
probably actually greater, than the density of flour:

<Quote>

And it is clear that dough, when it has been made into Matzah, will not
increase in quantity [volume] over the quantity of the flour, and if it
will, it will be but little.  But we can see "b'hush" that the quantity
of this dough is less than the quantity of the flour.

</Quote>

> Zev Sero               Something has gone seriously awry with this Court's

Yitzhak
--
Bein Din Ledin - bdl.freehostia.com
An advanced discussion of Hoshen Mishpat

 
 
In a message dated 5/1/2008 6:59:57 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
jkaplan@tenzerlunin.com writes:

A pesak  that the grandson of R. Chaim Brisker, notably RYBS, did not  
join  in. who knows how people "might" act; we only know how they did   
act.

Joseph Kaplan



>>>>
He did not allow joint "religious"  bodies.  He made an exception for "klapei 
chutz" type issues -- and  BTW was roundly criticized for that.  Given the 
history of his fraught  relations with the Reform movement, which tried to 
impose its will on many  German kehillos and willfully closed down yeshivos and 
mikvaos, there is no  chance that Hirsch would have looked benignly even on 
"klapei chutz" joint  bodies, either.  
 

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





**************Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car 
listings at AOL Autos.      
(http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20080501/6025ef1d/attachment.htm 

Cantor Wolberg asked:

> One may count the Omer in any language, however one must
> understand what he is saying. Shulchan Aruch w/Mishnah
> Brurah 489:1
> (Would this mean that if someone didn't understand Hebrew,
> he should do it in his mama lashon)?

From what I've heard, yes, most definitely. From what I've gathered over
the years, there are several things in this category, and what they all
have in ccommon is that they are not prayers. They are declarations. A
prayer is best when one understands what he is saying, but he is yotzay
even if he doesn't. But a declaration is meaningless unless he understands
what he is saying.

Other things in this category include Bitul Chametz and the Hagadah. When
one makes an Eruv Tavshilin (or one or the other eruvin), the bracha is a
prayer best said in Hebrew, but the paragraph afterward is a declaration
which he must understand. I think the Shma might also be in this category.

Of course, the best solution is to understand the Hebrew, and say it in
Hebrew. By doing so, one captures nuances unavailable in translation. This
time of year, the difference (if any) between Laomer and Baomer is a good
reminder of this idea.

Even if one is not fluent in Hebrew, one can accomplish this by looking at
the translation and then reciting the Hebrew. Several siddurim (of the
Linear or Interlinear style) make this much easier.

> One should L'chatchila count while standing. However, b'dieved,
> if one counted while sitting he is Yoitze. Shulchan Aruch
> w/Mishnah Brurah 489:1
> (Why, then, would someone be sitting, b'dieved, if he knew he
> should have been standing l'chatchila)?

The simplest answer would be in the case of someone who is unable to stand,
for medical or other reasons. He is in a b'dieved situation, so he make say
the bracha and count while seated.

(Suppose the halacha had been that if one counted while sitting, he is
*not* yotzay even b'dieved. In such a case, the most an invalid could do is
to count without the bracha.)

Akiva Miller
_____________________________________________________________
Get the sign you need for the impact you want. Click now!
http://thirdpartyoffers.ju
no.com/TGL2121/fc/Ioyw6i3oB4gETMWkNeoQU4BjSzSlGSy6bJqynRHAca4jMVztEhXrVw/?c
ount=1234567890

Yitzhak Grossman wrote:
> Zev Sero <zev@sero.name> wrote:
 
>> Now we do seem to have a dispute about the density of matzah, since
>> all the older sources assume it to have approximately the same density
>> as water, and the well-attested minhag in EY was to weigh 9 dirhams of
>> matzah for a kezayit, explicitly on this assumption that it has the
>> same density as water.  If more recent experimental data shows this
>> assumption to have been incorrect, then the weight required must be
>> adjusted accordingly.

> Note that Ralbag (cited by Kessef Mishneh, Temidin U'Mussafin 5:9)
> asserts that the density of Matzah is at most slightly less, and
> probably actually greater, than the density of flour:
> 
> <Quote>
> And it is clear that dough, when it has been made into Matzah, will not
> increase in quantity [volume] over the quantity of the flour, and if it
> will, it will be but little.  But we can see "b'hush" that the quantity
> of this dough is less than the quantity of the flour. 
> </Quote>

Yes, but flour is much less dense than water, and this has long been
recognised in halacha.  For instance, the shiur chalah is an isaron of
flour; taking the Rambam's shiur of a revi'it of water weighing 27
dirhams, and the Ottoman dirham of 3.2 grams, this would be 2.5 litres
of flour, which if it were as dense as water would weigh 2.5 kg.  But
the actual shiur used for chalah is approximately 1.5 kg, because flour
is something like 3/5 to 2/3 the density of water.  (RACN weighed
various kinds of wheat flour and found differences among them, but none
even approached the density of water.)

So the fact that matzah is more dense than the flour from which it
was baked is no surprise; the question is how much more dense.  The
older sources assume that it's only negligibly less dense than water.
The experimental data cited here on Avodah challenge that assumption.

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

On Thu, 2008-05-01 at 06:01 -0400, Cantor Wolberg wrote:


> 389. One should L'chatchila count while standing. However, b'dieved,
> if one counted while sitting he is Yoitze.
> Shulchan Aruch w/Mishnah Brurah 489:1
> (Why, then, would someone be sitting, b'dieved, if he knew he should
> have been standing l'chatchila)?

One typical example of this kind of thing is if he didn't know he should
be standing, then saw him do it wrong and approached him afterward. This
halacha comes to answer the question "does he need to repeat the count?"

--Ken

-- 
Ken (Chanoch) Bloom. PhD candidate. Linguistic Cognition Laboratory.
Department of Computer Science. Illinois Institute of Technology.
http://www.iit.edu/~kbloom1/

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20080501/3b07dcca/attachment.pgp 

On Thu, 1 May 2008 17:18:08 -0400
"" <ZviLampel@theJnet.com> wrote:

> Abarbanel Haggada with Questions I
> once learned a Haggada with the Abarbanel's commentary that is
> different from what is now easily available. In true Abarbanel style,
> it included a slew of "sefeikos" (kushyos) before his commentary
> containing the answers. For example, it asks how "avadim hayyinu" answers the four questions, and why the Mah Nishtana does
> not include the question of why on this night we drink four cups of
> yayyin. 
> Has
> anyone else seen this Abarbanel Haggada? If so, please tell me the
> publishing information or, better yet, send me a copy of the title page
> and the page on which this quesitons are printed. 
> Thank you,Zvi Lampel

You want the Zevah Pesah, available for free download from the
wonderful folks at HebrewBooks.org:

http://chabadlibrarybooks.com/details.aspx?hbid=10751

[The site says "Chabad Lubavitch Library, Ohel 
Yosef Yitzchak, Rare Hagada Collection, powered by HebrewBooks.org]

The press release announcing the making of the collection available
online is here:
http://www.chabad.org/news/arti
cle_cdo/aid/665216/jewish/Library-Makes-1000-Rare-Haggadahs-Available-Onlin
e.htm

I first saw it on Menachem Mendel's blog:
http://menachemmendel.net/blog/2008/04/17/chabad-library-p
osts-1000-haggadot-online/

The questions you mention are #7 and #5 respectively.

Yitzhak
--
Bein Din Ledin - bdl.freehostia.com
An advanced discussion of Hoshen Mishpat

I recall in the Agudas Achim in Hartford (R' R. Wolpe knows it very  
well) for daily shacharis,
there would be 4 people involved. First: beginning until Boruch  
sheomar; Second: Boruch Sheomar
until Yishtabach; third: Yishtabach until second ashrei; fourth:  
Ashrei until end.

Most would want the "third" one, but at least 4 were satisfied.

ri
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20080501/55b0345a/attachment.htm 

You are really asking "Why does anyone do anything b'dieved?"

Perhaps he was sitting and counted the omer, and only during counting
realized. (I've done this with Aleinu; I was already sitting for, say,
tachanun, and I went straight into Aleinu. It can happen if you aren't
with a minyan.) Or perhaps he realized during the day (say, while
reading the newspaper) that he didn't count the previous night, and he
immediately and spontaneously counted, without standing up first.

Your reasoning sounds good except with sefira, you're
talking about a special part of the service that stands
out.  If it is during the day, your explanation holds more;
however, I don't feel that is true for ma'ariv. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20080501/387c1c84/attachment.htm 

Micha Berger wrote:
> I just want to point out that no one bizman hazeh can successfully be
> makpid not to have chameitz gamur after peisach that wasn't sold on
> peisach.

At least in chu"l this is not the case.  It is perfectly possible to 
purchase products from non-Jewish owned stores.  "Out of town," where 
there are either no Jewish owned stores, or the only such stores don't 
sell there chometz anyway, there is really little choice in the matter.

Whether it is appropriate to do so in areas where it will effect a Jew's 
parnassa is a different issue.

-- 
Daniel M. Israel
dmi1@cornell.edu

Cantor Wolberg wrote:
> On a related topic, a good friend of mine, an O. musmach lost his  
> father and there were many O. rabbis at the levaya.
> He was told (contrary to what many feel is proper) that it was not  
> kovodik for a son to shovel earth, so he refrained from
> what he thought was correct. Up until he told me that, I always  
> encouraged children to participate in the mitzvah. Has
> anyone ever heard of this minhag or halacha?

I was told to not participate in the actual shoveling at my father's 
levayah.  I was very moved by the fact that, although most of the people 
there were not frum and were unused to filling in the grave themselves, 
they all willingly finished the job.

-- 
Daniel M. Israel
dmi1@cornell.edu

Saul.Z.Newman@kp.org wrote:
> 1. i believe it is a minhag in chabad to have maftir the whole year [ 
> one person left the early minyan where i daven shabbos because we 
> couldnt give him all the maftirs]

AFAIK everyone agrees with this in theory, however, since a person with 
a yarzheit in the coming week is generally given precedence, it doesn't 
usually happen.  I'm not sure why there would be fewer yarzheits in 
Chabad...

I would note that when I was an avel I was living in Tucson, where it 
was not always possible to get a minyan every day, although we usually 
did get one.  One consolation, however, was that I was able to get 
maftir about 90% of the time.

-- 
Daniel M. Israel
dmi1@cornell.edu

Richard Wolpoe wrote:
>     G-d told us to eat only matzah, and so we baked only matzah. But had
>     we tried to bake chametz (which, hypothetically, we did not try to do,
>     but, hypothetically, had we tried to do...), we wouldn't have had
>     time. In other words, G-d told us beforehand not to bake chametz,
>     because He already knew we wouldn't have had time. In retrospect, for
>     us, it made sense why He commanded us to bake only matzah: viz.,
>     that's all we had time for, in retrospect! Therefore, the command was
>     given with a certain ta'am already in G-d's Mind but NOT given to us,
>     and LATER, the ta'am became apparent to even us.
> 
> See The Beis Halevi on "Ba'avur Zeh"
> IIRC He essentially says the same thing, the mitzva was in anticipation 
> of the future history

I don't think the Bh"L fits particularly with the first part of this 
sevarah.  He is presumably going on the opinion that chometz was mutar 
that year, and we actually tried to bake bread.

-- 
Daniel M. Israel
dmi1@cornell.edu



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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 25, Issue 162
***************************************

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..."