Avodah Mailing List

Volume 25: Number 171

Thu, 08 May 2008

• 1. Re: Rabbi Michael Rosensweig - Kedoshim Tihiyu: The Obligation to Internalize Halachic Values and Adopt a Halachic World View (Richard Wolpoe)
• 2. Kareis was Passover and Circumcision in the Desert (Richard Wolpoe)
• 3. Re: Heter mechira (Richard Wolpoe)
• 4. Yom ha'atma'us etc. (Richard Wolpoe)
• 5. Re: Court retroactively revokes conversions (Arie Folger)
• 6. Re: Court retroactively revokes conversions (Micha Berger)
• 7. Re: Court retroactively revokes conversions (Moshe Feldman)
• 8. Re: Court retroactively revokes conversions (Daniel Eidensohn)
• 9. Re: Court retroactively revokes conversions (Arie Folger)
• 10. Chain of transmission (tikvaket)

Just a few comments interspersed.



On Sun, May 4, 2008 at 8:01 PM, Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org> wrote:

> I was asked offlist for a clearer description of my problem with RMR's
> devar Torah.
>
> IMHO, halakhah is made by analyzing the sources to obtain what
> possibilities exist. Then, one weighs the pros and cons of the various
> options. I described the criteria for such assessment as falling
> into three categories:
> - textual arguments: Ideas such as the majority of sources, whether the
>  idea appears in a code or in a teshuvah, the bredth of acceptance of
>  the author, etc... (IOW, sevara doesn't simply tells us what options
>  exist, some options exist more or less.)
> - mimetic weight: what did my father and grandfather do?
> - hashkafic value: does one or the other fit my general approach to
>  avodas Hashem or otherwise help me relate to the mitzvah?
>
> #1 The Gra favored the book sources (at least for his own practice),


For the GRA himself this method had boundaries. For thothers the slippery
slope allows people to use that GRA to justify paskening new Halacha from
the Gmara.  This is also attributed to the Rambam but in HIS time the Gmaar
was stil lrealtively NEW



> #2 Yekkes
> will accept much textually weaker arguments if they justify halakha
> as received.


Yekkes have a boundary, too - namely time- honored tradition.   You don't
monkey with halachah OR minhag w/o major justification and ONLY in a way
that conforms in both sytle and content

Any change I enforced in my shul had SOME precedent, I never made up new
stuff at all.




> Whereas Chassidum changed numerous practices to fit the
> Chassidic worldview.


This imho is dangerous. the hashkafa dictates the way to behave instead of
an objective read of the sources [mimetis are imho an alterante form of
source]

When Rackman radicalizes afkin'yu he is taking Aggdic hashkafa [the poor
Agunah! let's do ALL We can to help and over-rides precedent.   [I think
Rackman was well-meaning to propse this but it does not take a LOT of da'as
Torah to see he went too far!]

notice his technique does NOT really violate #1 as HE sees #1  and it
certainly does not violate #3, viz. the agenda supercedes the technical
halacha.

BTW at least TWO Rashi's I just learned in Kesubbos [daf 2: daf 3.]  are
very clear implications taht afkin'u is about making a FLAWED GET work, not
about  undoing  kiddushin w/o a GET.

I have hear this Sevara in someone else's name [iirc RASBA] but it is
clearto me that Rashi would hold afkin'u only re: a flawed GET...




>
>
> Brisker derekh is in the first camp. I'm not sure this is where R'
> Chaim Brisker himself was, as he fought being a poseiq lemaaseh, but
> the approach his derekh halimud fostered in further generations is
> highly textualist.
>

R. Gorleick A'H refused to teach Hullin because he avoided halacha lema'aseh
stuff bedavka. He THOUGHT Brisker but behaved like a regular Agudah type
Rosh Yeshiva - at least as far as I could tell.  I respected this. I sensed
he felt that the Rav  was a  bit too  radical  for his taste in his
Halachic  innovations, but he would never say it



>
> I believe that both RRW and I lament this shift.
>
> RRW mourns the loss of consideration of minhag avos, and the loss of
> inertia it creates.
>
> My concern is more on the hashkafic plane -- pesaq is increasingly
> divorced from anything that can create passion.
>

I think one can have a passion for being medakdeik in the  sources and their
real meaning
I was passionate that Zli Keidar on Seder night is a mistaken humra based
upon months of learning issur v'heter b'iyyun. B"H I was mechavein to the
AhSonthis.

But when I observe Kitniyyos, I am pasioante about minhag avos NOT about
Humra. I feel that this is an ashkenaic elegacy taht has been sanctified by
700 years of observance

I am native Litvak and an adopted Yekke.

I hold by the Litvisher passion for analysis and yekkisher passion for
precision and a MUCH higher sophistication in musical liturgy kri'a etc.

I think we should learn like the AhS and be noheig mostly like
Rema/Levush/Maharil in practice.

 I actually liked Brinbaum's apporaach to text. Fix the lower critical
errors and respect the Tradition and history behind the Liturgy. I think
Baer and Ya'avetz were similar in that vein.


>
>
> Tir'u baTov!
> -Micha
>


-- 
Kol Tuv / Best Regards,
RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com
see: http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080507/33a7fb1d/attachment-0001.htm>

On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 10:08 PM, Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org> wrote:

>
> Kareis (at least, in the opinion of numerous rishon) is a cessation of
> existence. The ultimate denial of olam baba. And yet, we started out
> correctly choosing saving lives with no risk of kareis.
>
> Tir'u baTov!
> -Micha
>
> --


AIUI it si being cut off from one's people [a real biggie amongsts a people
that demanded kever Avos! e.g kivru osi el avosai]

R. J. Weiss Shilta told us once, that one should NOT be quick to condemn and
he said [hassidishe style] that one should not be treated as cut-off until
he has done all 36 krissus.  IOW we do our best to avoid cutting people
off.  It was a very impressive compassionate bit of mussar that he gave us
that day and has always made a deep Impression on me [dvraim hanichnassim el
haleiv]
-- 
Kol Tuv / Best Regards,
RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com
see: http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080507/0e6f5c5b/attachment-0001.htm>

On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 6:29 PM, Cantor Wolberg <cantorwolberg@cox.net>
wrote:

> I'm curious what some of your reactions are to the concept of heter
> mechira. It should be pointed out that the Gemara is replete with examples
> of avoiding a Halachic prohibition by transferring title of ownership of a
> particular item (Maaser Sheni 4:5, Tosefta Pesachim chapter 2, Beitzah 17a,
> and Nedarim 48a). In fact, the Gemara (Bechorot 3b) even encourages selling
> an animal to a non-Jew before it gives birth for the first time to avoid the
> restrictions regarding a Bechor. Moreover, Mechirat Chametz has developed
> into a yearly routine in observant communities, though it is not quite the
> same.
> Kol tuv.
> ri
>

See the Tur in early hiclhos shabbos about being mafkir one's behaeima bein
l'vein atzmo on Shsbbos in order to avoid the prohibition in the Ten
commandments of working one's animal!

Now I am NOT saying we pasken like that , but the Tur DOES bring it as a
valid opinion!   FWIW Some have said that these kinds of heteirim were bad
precdents and are fore-funners of Liberalism in Jewish Halachah..


-- 
Kol Tuv / Best Regards,
RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com
see: http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080507/3f2ffd9b/attachment-0001.htm>

Well it IS Israel Independence day but it is NOT the 5th of Iyyar.   If the
5th of Iyyar has qedusha, then does it make sense to say Hallel 2 days
earlier?

My position has pretty much always been the the 5th of Iiyar is like lag
ba'omer. IOW  a kind of a middle-of-the-road position between full Purim
like frivolity and Tachanun-bearing Sefira suffering.   Now I have
re-examined my Centrist postion and I find that it now makes sense to me on
another level...

The Mourning of Talmidei R. Akiva is related to the uprsiningn against Rome
which extinguished the last embers of the 2nd Commonwealth. As such Sefira
connotes an almost 9 Av Hurban  mindset approaching the loss of a major
chunk of the remnants of the hurban of 70 CE... In a sense efira is a hurban
achar hurban,[like bishul achar bishul] not a full-fleged Hurban, but a mini
one.

Now 5 Iyyar and 28 Iyyar [Yom yerushalayyim] are not complete ge'ulos [like
Purim] but in a sense we are witnessing over time a rolling back of the
damage done in 70/135 CE. In the span of about 70 years [roughly 66  to
135]  things went downhill in stages, with 9 Av being a  major watershed
point. And - Lag ba'omer was the one bright spot in the 132-135 era, a break
within that plague.

5 Iyyar & 28 Iyyar  represent two NEW "breaks" given to us by HKBH.  Not
complete ge'ulah but a slight undoing [step by step, stage by stage] of the
earlier events. It therefore makes sense to me to think of them as much more
closely analogous to 33 omer.  Two days representing a roll back of the
damage.

AISI since only the complete G'eulah will merit full Hallel,and so therefore
it is premature to do so NOW but it IS appropriate to pause from our Sefirah
mourning to add 2 "modern" lag Ba'omer-like days to our repertoire and to
appreciate HKBH's partial kindness

After all in the Seder we give appreciation fro 15 separate "ma'alos"  In
this ge'ulah we have at least 2. Maybe the UN vote in 1947 is a third.   So
in a span of 60+ years we are seeing a restoration of EY as a makkom torah.
And soon, it will host the world's biggest roasted lamb/kid Bar-B-Q on the
next 14th of Nissan, bimheira beiyameinu-

-- 
Kol Tuv / Best Regards,
RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com
see: http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080507/740443a8/attachment-0001.htm>

R. Moshe Feldman wrote:
> I understand that many RZ rabbis follow the view of Rav Goren zt"l
> that in EY the rules of conversion are different than in Chu"l.
> Specifically, Rav Goren held that in Chu"l kabballas ol mitzvos is
> me'akev because there is no national identity in Chu"l and we fear
> that they had converted for an ulterior motive and that they will
> revert to their gentile roots once that ulterior motive disappears.
> However, in Israel, the view of the Yerushalmi is to be followed that
> the ikkar of geirus is joining the Jewish people, and in EY there is
> no chashash that they will go back to being goyim.

... and not everyone accepts this inordinary 'hidush of Rav Goren. Hence, many 
authorities, regardless of political afiliation, *will* *question* *the* 
*validity* *of* *Rav* *Goren's* *giyurim*, even while believing that Rav 
Goren was a great hero, who single handedly made the IDF and everybody care 
about burrying all body parts of fallen soldiers, who single handedly enabled 
Jewish prayer in Ma'arat haMakhpelah, and who brought about that the IDF 
kitchens are kosher, among other achievements.

But, since this was posted in reaction to the Minhal haGiyur Brouhaha, let me 
state that I am ignorant of the facts surrounding their usual standards, and 
am still sorting through the mountain of information I am getting. By most 
accounts, however, they do require a commitment to actual shemirat hamitzvot. 
Whether they use sufficient derishah ve'haqirah, I don't know, but they 
definitely don't hold lekhat'hilah that qabalat 'ol mitzvot is unnecessary.

Life isn't always easy or straightforward[, that is why it's worth living].

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

On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 11:45:31AM +0300, Moshe Feldman wrote:
: I understand that many RZ rabbis follow the view of Rav Goren zt"l
: that in EY the rules of conversion are different than in Chu"l.

R' Goren said it to? The usually cited source is Mishpetei Uziel 38.

Also related is R' ChO Gradzensky (Achiezer 3:26, already cited in this
thread) which says a geir who converts with the intent of being a mumar
letei'avon bedavar achas is bedi'eved mequbal as a geir.


Not sure what either have to do with a BD that doesn't sufficiently screen
qabalas ol mitzvos for people who are simply *beshitah* "meqabeil ...
chutz midavar echad" (to quote Bekhoros 30b).

But the current argument doesn't rely on this. If it were just that
once, the BD didn't sufficiently check (at least to a level of certainty
necessary to condemn children to mamzeirus), they would need derishah
vechaqirah to check the metzi'us of every other person who went through
that BD.

Rather, they're arguing that the abnormalities in that case were so
grevious that the dayanim aren't even 3 hedyotos. Not agreeing, just
reporting.

And while I'm putting in disclaimers: Avodah appropriate arguments would
only include discussions of the din in theory, not heated arguments over
the metzi'us. You have been forewarned by the moderator.


Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 18th day, which is
micha@aishdas.org        2 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Netzach sheb'Tifferes: What is imposing about
Fax: (270) 514-1507                             balance?

On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 2:42 PM, Arie Folger <afolger@aishdas.org> wrote:
> ... and not everyone accepts this inordinary 'hidush of Rav Goren. Hence, many
> authorities, regardless of political afiliation, *will* *question* *the*
> *validity* *of* *Rav* *Goren's* *giyurim*,

As they should.  But they should do so respectfully, as a machlokes
l'shem shamayim.  After all, this is not just a shitas yachid, as Rav
Unterman held a similar view, not to mention many rabbanim nowadays.

I should also point out that the fact that the Russian Jews are of
Jewish lineage is an additional basis for leniency that many rabbanim
rely upon.

Perhaps R'n Boublil could give us an "insider's view" on this matter.

Kol tuv,
Moshe

R' Moshe Feldman wrote:
> I understand that many RZ rabbis follow the view of Rav Goren zt"l
> that in EY the rules of conversion are different than in Chu"l.
> Specifically, Rav Goren held that in Chu"l kabballas ol mitzvos is
> me'akev because there is no national identity in Chu"l and we fear
> that they had converted for an ulterior motive and that they will
> revert to their gentile roots once that ulterior motive disappears.
> However, in Israel, the view of the Yerushalmi is to be followed that
> the ikkar of geirus is joining the Jewish people, and in EY there is
> no chashash that they will go back to being goyim...
>
> While I personally am uncomfortable with this view, I respect the
> rabbanim involved and consider this to be an issue of eilu v'eilu
> divrei elokim chayim.
>   
What does this have to do with eilu v'eilu? Do you personally consider 
the views of all rabbis valid? For example do you also hold that R' 
Rackman's beis din provides a legitimate solution to agunos? Or do you 
agree with R' Marc Angel that there is no need that gerim accept the 
obligation to keep mitzvos?

In addition do you agree that those converted according to Rav Goren's 
view - become goyim when they leave the country?

R' Jonathan Rosenblum 
<http://www.cross-currents.com/archives/2007/06/26/responding-to-s
ome-critics/>wrote: 
"One of Rabbi Goren?s other halachic innovations, recognized by no other 
/posek/, was to condition /geirus /performed by him on the ger remaining 
in Israel. Apparently, he felt that non-observant gentiles could become 
Jews in Israel but not abroad. The bearers of such certificates of 
geirus have created a great many problems for /batei din /abroad when 
they came bearing Rabbi Goren?s ?conditional? /geirus/."

Daniel Eidensohn

I wrote:
> ... and not everyone accepts this inordinary 'hidush of Rav Goren. Hence, 
> many authorities, regardless of political afiliation, *will* *question*
> *the* *validity* *of* *Rav* *Goren's* *giyurim*,

R. Moshe Feldman replied:
> As they should. ?But they should do so respectfully, as a machlokes
> l'shem shamayim. ?After all, this is not just a shitas yachid, as Rav
> Unterman held a similar view, not to mention many rabbanim nowadays.

I concur. I thought that much was clear from my mention of some of Rav Goren's 
heroic achievements. But the part about respecting has little to do with the 
question of da'at ya'hid or not. It is generally our duty to respect each 
others, all the more so to respect talmidei 'hakhamim yerei shamayim.

Kol tuv,

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

Shalom
Does anyone have a list of the chain of Mesorah from Moshe Rabbeinu up until
present times. Parts of this exist in various books - but there seem to be
gaps - does anyone have one list with Rebbes and Talmidim?

Thanks
Doron Kornbluth
info@doronkornbluth.com



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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 25, Issue 171
***************************************

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..."