Avodah Mailing List

Volume 25: Number 175

Fri, 09 May 2008

• 1. Re: Heter mechira (Zev Sero)
• 2. Re: Olam Haba is static (Micha Berger)
• 3. Re: Court retroactively revokes conversions (Michael Makovi)
• 4. Re: Court retroactively revokes conversions (Daniel Eidensohn)
• 5. Re: Court retroactively revokes conversions (Arie Folger)
• 6. Re: Court retroactively revokes conversions (Daniel Eidensohn)
• 7. Re: Court retroactively revokes conversions (Arie Folger)
• 8. Re: Court retroactively revokes conversions (T613K@aol.com)
• 9. Re: Education - was RAYK and the end of chol (T613K@aol.com)
• 10. Re: Court retroactively revokes conversions (T613K@aol.com)
• 11. Re: Yom ha'atma'us etc. (Micha Berger)
• 12. Re: Yom ha'atma'us etc. (Micha Berger)

Michael Makovi wrote:

>> 3. What if the goy doesn't want to sell it back?  Are you prepared to
>> part with it permanently?
>> R' Zev Sero
> 
> So do what we do with chametz - sell it to him for $5 down payment
> now, and tell him that after Pesach, he has to pay another
> $1,000,000,000 to keep it. So too with the land - sell it for a
> pittance now and a fortune when shemitta ends. I don't know if we do
> this, but we could if we needed to.

Chametz is sold for its market value, to be assessed after Pesach.
If the goy wants to keep the chametz, we will hire an assessor and
come up with a fair price which he will pay.  We'll be happy to get
the money and part with the chametz, and in fact the only reason we
agree to buy the stuff back is because if we don't then next year
we won't find a goy willing to buy our chametz.

In the case of the land, is the farmer willing to accept the fair
value of his land, and give it up to the goy, and especially to an
Arab?  If it wasn't shmita and an Arab offered him the fair market
value of his farm, would he accept it and leave?  Somehow I doubt it.

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

On Fri, May 09, 2008 at 11:58:10AM -0400, Rich, Joel wrote:
: I thought (perhaps incorrectly) that let man dpalig that once one leaves
: this world, it's only through the actions of those in this world that
: (s)he can move up.  The original post seemed to me to imply that there
: was a machloket on this point on areivim.

I thought the question on Areivim was in the opposite direction... What
does "moving up" mean? In particular, the "moving" notion doesn't fit
a "static shamayim" (OhB lefi haRambam). How can they change at all?

I gave a teaser implying what I wrote this morning: That the person's
cheshbon, being lemaalah min hazeman, includes all the effects of all
his actions. Including inspiring people to make decisions that occur
after his petirah. (With the usual bit about lemaalah min hazeman being
different than knowing the future -- note the word "future" which isn't
lemaalah min hazeman! Thus no question on his children's bechirah.)

Or, one can leave the worldview of REED et al, but then you have to
explain what time in Shamayim is, and how it stays in sync with time as
it exists here, part of space-time and physics. And in sync with which
relativistic frame of reference?

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 19th day, which is
micha@aishdas.org        2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote
Fax: (270) 514-1507                         withdrawal and submission?

> it is NOT a straw man - here is why thre is a hilluk::
> While No ger is expected to be 100% faithful to Troah than any normal human
> the Hilluk here is that the Ger in OUR CASE is artciulating his human
> FRAILTY during hsi process of accepting the mitzvos. IOW he is going IN with
> the foresight that he may fall down.  This is the Hiddush. Indeed there is
> no hiddush if after accepting 100% w/o pre-conditions that he falls down he
> is OK
>
> See the Hilluk?
>
> R' Wolpoe

In other words, the only thing remarkable is that he is admitting his
frailty, and yet his gerut is kosher. It is b'vadai that had he NOT
admitted his frailty, and then violated, he'd be a kosher ger.

In other words, he has no incentive for lying, he is not punished for
telling the truth.

Mikha'el Makovi

R' Michael Makovi wrote:
>> Achiezer (3:26) is translated as:
>>
>> "Where, however, it is evident that later he will certainly transgress Torah
>> prohibions - the violatin of the Sabbath and the eating of    non-kosher
>> meat [i.e., nonobservance of the Jewish dietary laws] - and we clearly know
>> his intent, that he converts only for             appearance's sake, with no
>> inner conviction, this constitutes a proven assessment that what he says -
>> that he accepts the commandments upon himself is not [worth] anything.
>> Consequently, this is a flaw in his acceptance of the commandmetns that
>> prevents [the conversion from taking effect]."
>>
>> R' Daniel Eidensohn
>>     
>
> In other words, violating Shabbat and kashrut doesn't necessarily have
> to invalidate the gerut, but we say that it does, because these are so
> important that no one violating them b'teiavon can possibly be a good
> Jew (whether because his will is so weak, or because it can't truly be
> merely b'teiavon), and thus they serve as benchmarks, by our own
> choice and discretion, not intrinsically.
>
>   
What you are saying is simply not the view of the Achiezer. He doesn't 
single them as being inherently different than the other mitzvos if he 
actually meant that they really are not different than the other mitzvos 
but are simple pragmatic benchmarks.  Your understanding simply doesnt 
fit into his words


?????? (?:??.?): ?"?, ????? ???"?. ???"? ???? ?? ???? ???"? ???"? ????? 
????? ??? ??? ????? ???? ????? ?????, ??"? ???? ???? ??? ???? ????? ???? 
?? ????? ?? ????? ????? ?? ???? ?????? ??"? ???????, ?"? ??? ?? ????? 
????? ?????, ????? ???? ????? ??? ???? ???? ??? ????? ????? ????? ?????. 
???? ???? ????? ???? ?????? ????? ???? ?? ?? ?????? ???? ???? ??? ?????? 
?????? ???? ?????? ?????? ????? ????? ?????? ?? ????? ???? ?? ???, ??? 
?????? ????? ??? ????? ????? ???? ????? ??? ???? ??? ?"? ??? ????? ????? 
????? ????? ?

On Friday, 9. May 2008 15.44:41 Richard Wolpoe wrote:
> IOW he is going IN with
> the foresight that he may fall down. ?This is the Hiddush. Indeed there is
> no hiddush if after accepting 100% w/o pre-conditions that he falls down he
> is OK
>
> See the Hilluk?

Nu... The 'hidush is strong enough that it makes your post worthwhile, but too 
weak for anyone to consider it an invalid 'idush and require more. KNLAD.
-- 
Arie Folger
http://www.ariefolger.googlepages.com

R' s kadish wrote:
> 2. "Russians" are not "stam goyim". There is a Torah obligation to
> encourage those with a personal connection to the Jewish people to
> formally join it through gerut. Especially for people who are born into
> Jewish families ("zera yisrael"), identify as Jews, and have even suffered
> anti-Semitism (and quite a few have). Or who are married to Jews. This
> in not just the opinion of Rav Uzziel and those cited above, but also of
> many Ashkenazic poskim in modern times such as Rav Azriel Hildesheimer,
> and is widely accepted (including to the best of my knowledge by the RCA).
>
>   
Would love to have a clear source that it is a Torah obligation to 
proselytize "zera yisroel" or all the other groups you mentioned. Where 
does Rav Uzziel and Rav Hildesheimer state such a position - and where 
is the confirmation that contemporary poskim agree with it?


 I assume that you would agree with the goals of Kulanu 
<http://www.kulanu.org/>  and some other organization which try to 
convert all those possibly descended from Spanish Jewish or marrano's , 
the Ugandans who  converted themselves to Judaism in the early 1900's as 
rebellion against the Britsh and suffered anti-semitism at then hand of 
Idi Amin etc etc., 

This hashkofa is precisely the point of dispute between the chareidi 
poskim and the Religious Zionists. It interesting to note that Rav 
Shlomo Riskin wrote an article rejecting the position of Rav Uziel/Rav 
Marc Angel in Tradition back in 1974. Therefore it would be helpful if 
you provided more specific sources for this approach.

Daniel Eidensohn

RMM wrote:
> If so, then Rabbi Wolpoe's assertion still stands, that as long as one
> accepts the mitzvot in theory, one is a valid ger, even if he violates
> b'teiavon.

Could RRW interpret his own post, please? I was under the impression that he 
explained what full, actualized, practical qabalat 'ol mitzvot means, 
precisely because he did *not* want to suggest that qabalat 'ol mitzvot is 
merely theorethical.

I am sure that you can see the difference between someone who'se ignorance or 
ta'avah may bring him to grab some cholent out of the pot without watching 
out whether thereby he is also transgressing hilkhot bishul beShabbat, and 
someone whose expected ta'avah will include not resisting regularly opening 
his business on Shabbat, so far so, that it wasn't even closed during his 
very first month being Jewish.

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

 
 
From: "Richard Wolpoe" _rabbirichwolpoe@gmail.com_ 
(mailto:rabbirichwolpoe@gmail.com) 

 

>>When I learned the sugya of Giyyur with R. Parness one summer  [circa 1973]
he concluded that a prospective ger who is mekabel "ol mitzovs"  - despite
admitting that he might give in to temptation - is  acceptable.  IOW he did
not have to plege absolute compliance, just  sincere acceptance.

What more can one ask from any normal human?   can perfection ever be
considered a  prerequesite?<<


>>>>>
Who in the world ever demanded a promise of perfection as a prerequisite  for 
gerus?!
And who ever nullified a gerus on the grounds that the convert turned  out to 
be a less than perfect tzaddik?!





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





**************Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family 
favorites at AOL Food.      
(http://food.aol.com/dinner-tonight?NCID=aolfod00030000000001)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080509/1c7deac3/attachment-0001.htm>

 
 
From: "Richard Wolpoe" _rabbirichwolpoe@gmail.com_ 
(mailto:rabbirichwolpoe@gmail.com) 


>  My father once said to me (I have mentioned this before) that there was
>  nothing wrong with Mizrachi that wouldn't be corrected by Torah  learning,
> that whatever was wrong with Mizrachi -- laxity in mitzvos, or  in tznius
> -- stemmed from amaratzus and a lack of Torah knowledge, and  that when they
> began to seriously learn Torah, these faults would be  corrected. [--TK]
 

RRW then wrote:
>>I have  a feeling that is perhaps part of the reason why  RYBS wanted women
learning Talmud because nowadays education is paramount.  And those who
understand the process of Talmud and poskim have a much better  appreciation
for applying Halachah in everyday  life.<<

 

>>>>>
Yet in the Torah world Talmud learning for girls is considered a radical,  
politically motivated innovation, and we do not in practice see the same  
correlation between advanced Talmudic learning and dikduk bemitzvos among women  
that we see among men.  Often it is just the opposite (see Hollywood FL for  one 
example) -- in the MO communities where women are more likely to have  learned 
at least some Talmud, there is visibly LESS tznius among the  women.  If 
anything, the correlation goes the other way -- across the  spectrum, in the 
schools and communities where women do NOT learn Talmud, they  are far MORE likely 
to cover their hair, not wear shorts or sleeveless  dresses in public, and so 
on.  Learning Talmud does not seem to have  the same positive effect on women 
in terms of increasing halachic observance and  yiras Shamayim that it has on 
men.
 
Having said all that I will add that my father did not hold that it is  
always absolutely assur for a woman to learn Talmud (certainly there have been  
individual great women in history who learned Gemara), but he did hold that this  
should not be done on a community-wide basis as a general part of women's  
education, as a matter both of halacha and of public policy.
 
I would suggest that it is more important to encourage young women to MARRY  
talmidei chachamim than to BECOME talmidei chachamim.  Men have a strong  
tendency to live up to (or sometimes, sadly, down to) what is expected of them  by 
the women in their lives.  This is why women have such a civilizing  
influence on society.






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





**************Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family 
favorites at AOL Food.      
(http://food.aol.com/dinner-tonight?NCID=aolfod00030000000001)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080509/dfda78da/attachment-0001.htm>

 
 
From: "s kadish" _skadish1@gmail.com_ (mailto:skadish1@gmail.com) 

>>Despite  the widespread discussion of #1, in our experience it is #2 that
is truly the  motivation for the batei din. The ingathering of the exiles
was never  promised to be lily-white: The State of Israel has accepted --
rightly and  justly -- the surviving remnant of communities that suffered
Hitler, Stalin,  and 70 years of communism. These included intermarried
families and their  descendants. It is precisely this point that those
who disqualify the RZ  batei din most disagree with: The charedim view
the recent aliyah of  1,000,000+ Russians as a Torah tragedy rather than
as a historical  vindication of Netach Yisrael. That is the difference
that makes all the  difference.<<

Shabbat Shalom,
Seth (Avi) Kadish
Karmiel,  Israel




>>>>>
Thank you for clarifying this extremely important point.
 
I would add that the flood of Russians that were brought into Israel on  the 
basis of the flimsiest of Jewish connections were /deliberately/  brought in 
by the secular government, with the precise intention of diluting the  
influence of the religious parties -- charedi and DL alike.
 
Many charedim are very unhappy with what they see as the DL tendency to  do 
the secular Zionists' dirty work for them -- retroactively "kashering" what  
amounts to a spiritual eruv rav -- without really expecting that the majority of 
 these Russians will ever be observant.
 
The testimony which has been brought here, to the effect that the DL  batei 
din DO grill would-be converts intensively, suggests that maybe these  charedi 
criticisms are having an effect.  In addition, negative experiences  with 
large numbers of converts who proved to be very problematic have also  probably 
had their effect, such that DL batei din are, perhaps, belatedly  tightening up 
their standards.




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





**************Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family 
favorites at AOL Food.      
(http://food.aol.com/dinner-tonight?NCID=aolfod00030000000001)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080509/c9a5df51/attachment-0001.htm>

On Wed, May 07, 2008 at 11:32:43PM -0400, Richard Wolpoe wrote:
: 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?

I discussed this question with my father, and concluded that if there
is anything one is celebrating on YhA, it's that there exists a state
in which holidays are moved lekhavod Shabbos.

That said, I'm not sure what neis happened on 5 Iyyar either. (Aside
from my father's line that 37 Jews got together and had fewer than
38 opinions. <g>) And the actual yeshu'ah came with the reduction of
hostilities - 4 Sivan (June 11). I don't want to get into opinions
about the history, just pointing out that "momentous occasion" isn't
the criterion for Hallel or a Purim Qatan.

: AISI since only the complete G'eulah will merit full Hallel...

Then there should be no Hallel bizman hazeh. Hallel would only be
something coined by the melech hamashiach or his contemporaries.

Purim and Chanukah were partial yeshuos, commemorated without Hallel
(this is explicit in the gemara - no Hallel because we were still under
shibud Achasheveiros at the end of the story) but where was a recognized
supernatural event on each of those dates.

So, regardless of how one personally assess the significance of the event,
I do not see how 5 Iyar gets Purim Qatan status.

Notice that this argument would not apply to Yom Y-m. There the day
centers on something its observers believe to be an identifiable lemaalah
min hateva event.

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 19th day, which is
micha@aishdas.org        2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote
Fax: (270) 514-1507                         withdrawal and submission?

On Wed, May 07, 2008 at 11:32:43PM -0400, Richard Wolpoe wrote:
: 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?

I discussed this question with my father, and concluded that if there
is anything one is celebrating on YhA, it's that there exists a state
in which holidays are moved lekhavod Shabbos.

That said, I'm not sure what neis happened on 5 Iyyar either. (Aside
from my father's line that 37 Jews got together and had fewer than
38 opinions. <g>) And the actual yeshu'ah came with the reduction of
hostilities - 4 Sivan (June 11). I don't want to get into opinions
about the history, just pointing out that "momentous occasion" isn't
the criterion for Hallel or a Purim Qatan.

: AISI since only the complete G'eulah will merit full Hallel...

Then there should be no Hallel bizman hazeh. Hallel would only be
something coined by the melech hamashiach or his contemporaries.

Purim and Chanukah were partial yeshuos, commemorated without Hallel
(this is explicit in the gemara - no Hallel because we were still under
shibud Achasheveiros at the end of the story) but where was a recognized
supernatural event on each of those dates.

So, regardless of how one personally assess the significance of the event,
I do not see how 5 Iyar gets Purim Qatan status.

Notice that this argument would not apply to Yom Y-m. There the day
centers on something its observers believe to be an identifiable lemaalah
min hateva event.

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 19th day, which is
micha@aishdas.org        2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote
Fax: (270) 514-1507                         withdrawal and submission?


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 25, Issue 175
***************************************

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..."