Avodah Mailing List

Volume 25: Number 420

Tue, 16 Dec 2008

• 1. Re: 400 men (Zev Sero)
• 2. Re: : esav (Saul Guberman)
• 3. Re: [Areivim] Seeing the Swiss Alps (Micha Berger)
• 4. Re: 400 men (Micha Berger)
• 5. Truth about Sheva Brochos (cantorwolb...@cox.net)
• 6. Re: City named after AZ (T6...@aol.com)
• 7. Re: City named after AZ (Simon Montagu)
• 8. Re: City named after AZ (Yitzhak Grossman)
• 9. Re: City named after AZ (Moshe Y. Gluck)
• 10. Re: City named after AZ (Zev Sero)
• 11. Re: RSRH about Shimon and Levi (Yitzhak Grossman)
• 12. Re: Did RSRH Write LH about Shimon and Levi (Yitzhak Grossman)
• 13. Re: RSRH about Shimon and Levi (Micha Berger)
• 14. Re: Did RSRH Write LH about Shimon and Levi (Yitzhak Grossman)

Micha Berger wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 09:11:00PM -0500, Gershon Dubin wrote:
> : The 400 men who deserted Esav were later rewarded, per Rashi, in the
> : times of Dovid hamelech...
 
> I looked at it and left very confused.
> 
> Does Bereishis Rabba (quoted by Rashi 33:16) mean that these 400 people
> who slipped away 1 by 1 survived, became geirim, and joined David
> haMelekh's camel forces?

Presumably it refers to their gilgulim.


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

On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 09:32, SBA <s...@sba2.com> wrote:

> rom: "Eli Turkel"
> Rashbam also takes a very positive attitude towards Esav that the 400
> men with him were an honor guard and that he was genuine in his good
> feelings towards Yaakov.
>
>
> I learned that today - listening to a CD of a Parsha Shiur which was given
> nightly by Reb Yankele zt'l, the Pshevorsker rebbe in Antwerp.
>
> He expresses great astonishment at this Rashbam.
> 1) Because the Rashbam usually goes for posheter pshat, and
> 2) What is the Rashbam's source for this?
>
> SBA
>

It seems to be the poshet pshat of the story.  Yaakov was expecting a
battle.  You should expect some sort of battle to be recorded.  Also no real
treaty (bris) is recorded.

Saul

Saul
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20081215/930cc0a4/attachment-0001.htm>

On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 07:33:16PM -0500, Joshua Meisner wrote:
: I do not understand the mishnah to mean that a person should ignore the
: beauty of nature around him, but merely that to cease the learning that one
: is currently actively engaged in in order to take note of such nature is a
: misplacement of priorities...

Lakol zeman va'eis...

Another possibility: The issur is in interrupting one's learning.
Admiring Niagra Falls as Hashem's beauty, to be inspired by "mah rabu
ma'asekha Hashem", isn't interrupting learning. (I know, it's derush-y.
But my father likes it.)

But then, someone who gets a "mah rabu ma'asekha Hashem" feeling from
the beauty of a sugya really has no motivation.

Third: R' Ya'aqov's word for learning is "mishnaso". How are you going
to memorize something if you stop in the middle of the repetitions? Such
a person is going to mangle the mishnayos he's trying to preserve!

Fourth: R' Ya'aqov is Acheir's grandson, the one who ends up answering
Elisha ben Avuyah's original question by stating that "lema'an ya'arikhun
yamekha" referred to olam haba, not olam hazeh. Among the things blamed
for Acheir's going off the path is his pursuit of Hellenic works. As in
the aesthetics of nature.


The other question is whether R' Steinman really meant that he would
only interrupt his gemara learning for beauty that motivates a berakhah,
for the berakhah itself, or the story altogether shifted and he simply
wanted to avoid being bemaqom safeiq about whether to make one.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             A person must be very patient
mi...@aishdas.org        even with himself.
http://www.aishdas.org         - attributed to R' Nachman of Breslov
Fax: (270) 514-1507

On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 01:40:46PM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
:>Does Bereishis Rabba (quoted by Rashi 33:16) mean that these 400 people
:>who slipped away 1 by 1 survived, became geirim, and joined David
:>haMelekh's camel forces?

: Presumably it refers to their gilgulim.

Does Bereishis Rabba mention Gilgulim?

If so, would you argue that it contains material R' Saadia Gaon never
saw? Remember, his firm rejection of ha'atakah was because he was sure
it's not mentioned anywhere by Chazal. Even if we don't "hold like him"
on this, that's historical evidence that the idea didn't appear in any
famous and widely available sefarim.

AFAIK, it's usually dated to some time between Talmud Y-mi and Shas. But
then it was subjection to accretion over time, so who knows?

We could use a dochaq teirutz that RSG's ha'ataqah isn't gilgul, because
it involves a reincarnation of the entire nara"n. I find this a dochaq
because it means that RSG came out strongly against one belief, didn't
distinguish it from a mutar belief that differs from it only in ways
that require some explanation, and RSG never even mentions the mutar
belief anywhere to boot.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             A cheerful disposition is an inestimable treasure.
mi...@aishdas.org        It preserves health, promotes convalescence,
http://www.aishdas.org   and helps us cope with adversity.
Fax: (270) 514-1507         - R' SR Hirsch, "From the Wisdom of Mishlei"

R' Micha asks:
Since the CS holds that the point of panim chadashos is to add joy to 
the meal, why would the qatan have to know what's going on? 

Good question. There are two aspects. The mere presence of the katan could
very well add joy, or ch'v detract from the joy if the katan was crying,
screaming or being disruptive.

I think the point of the katan knowing what's going on would minimize the possibility of the katan being disruptive, thereby, adding joy to the meal. 
I don't know about you, but anytime I've had a meal with a disruptive
katan, it was certainly no joy. On the other hand, if I had a katan at the
meal who knew what was going on and cognitively well disposed, it would add
to the joy of the meal.
ri

 
 
>>When I was a teenager, I visited the city of Christchurch in New  Zealand.  
Should enunciation of the name of this city be forbidden?   Does the fact 
that it has become the name of a city make a  difference?<<

Kol tuv
Dov Kay


 
 
>>>>>
I don't know the answer to your questions but the  city you mention is not 
the only one with such problems.  What if a Jew  lives in Corpus Christi?  How 
about the countries of El Salvador and  Trinidad?




--Toby Katz
=============
Read *Jewish World  Review* at _http://jewishworldreview.com/_ 
(http://jewishworldreview.com/) 



--------------------------
**************Make your life easier with all your friends, email, and 
favorite sites in one place.  Try it now. 
(http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&;icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000010)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20081215/3b76fa56/attachment-0001.htm>

On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 10:37 AM, Zev Sero <z...@sero.name> wrote:

3. Despite all the above it is indeed proper not to use it, and those
> who are careful and have a Jewish sensitivity try to avoid it.


I remember once an announcement in Oxford shul including directions to the
location of a meeting. Rather than mention the name of the college they said
something like "The third turning on the right after you-know-who
you-know-what".
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20081215/b6ad2a2e/attachment-0001.htm>

On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 13:37:15 -0500
Zev Sero <z...@sero.name> wrote:

...

> 2. There is no AZ whose name is "Christchurch".  The city was not named
> for their god, but for the college in Oxford, which was in turn named for
> a church building, which was in turn named for their god.  And since they

It is also worth noting that "Christ" is arguably not even a proper
name at all; it is merely the English version of the Greek
"???????" (Khrist?s), the translation of the Hebrew "Mashiah".  I don't
know if this etymology is Halachically significant, though.

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

Yitzhak
--
Bein Din Ledin - http://bdl.freehostia.com
A discussion of Hoshen Mishpat, Even Ha'Ezer and other matters

R' Simon Montagu:
I remember once an announcement in Oxford shul including directions to the
location of a meeting. Rather than mention the name of the college they
said something like "The third turning on the right after you-know-who
you-know-what".
----------------



KT,
MYG

Moshe Y. Gluck wrote:
> R' Simon Montagu:
> I remember once an announcement in Oxford shul including directions to
> the location of a meeting. Rather than mention the name of the college
> they said something like "The third turning on the right after
> you-know-who you-know-what".
> ----------------
> 
> Sanhedrin 63b: Shelo Yomar... Shmor Li B'tzad Avodas Kochavim Plonis.

The chiddush here is that it's not actually an AZ at all; it's a college
that was named for a building that was named for an AZ.  And yet people
try to avoid naming it, because it just doesn't feel right.


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

On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 22:46:02 +1100
"Meir Rabi" <meir...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:

...

> Perhaps the response was not a matter of principle, that's no way to treat
> my sister; but a matter of survival - If we allow this to go unpunished then
> we will certainly be seen as easy prey and attacked from all quarters. Is
> the T saying this is a legitimate and unanswerable position? But
> nevertheless it is not the T way?

This is exactly how Or Ha'Haim understands Shimon and Levi's position:

http://bdl.freehostia.com/2007/09/06/best-defense-good-offense/

Yitzhak
--
Bein Din Ledin - http://bdl.freehostia.com
A discussion of Hoshen Mishpat, Even Ha'Ezer and other matters

On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 18:53:54 -0500
Yitzchok Levine <Larry.Lev...@stevens.edu> wrote:

My father points out Rav Ya'akov's suggestions for why the Torah's own
narrative of the sale of Yosef is consistent with the rules of Lashon
Ha'Ra (Emes Le'Ya'akov Bereishis 37:18):

"A student asked me how to explain that which the Torah told these
stories about Yosef's brothers, is this not in the category of Lashon
Ha'Ra?

At first I answered that the prohibition against LH applies only to the
living, and it is permitted according to the law to tell LH about the
dead.  The only problem is the Herem Ha'Kodmonim (see OH 606:3), which
only bars Mozi Shem Ra, not Lashon Ha'Ra.

But in truth, there is no question to begin with, for Yosef's brothers
sentenced him to death according to the Din ... and they certainly
intended Le'Shem Shamayim. ...

And in truth, even though all the commentators on the Torah have
already written that the quarrel between Yosef and his brothers was not
a quarrel rooted in jealousy and hatred between them, but it was a
disputed Le'Shem Shamayim over the Ikar Ha'Din, that the brothers ruled
that Yosef was pursuing [Rodef] them and it was therefore permitted to
kill him, there are nevertheless those who feel that this is merely
Derush that was said to cover up for our forefathers, in order not to
slander (Le'Hozi La'az) them.  But in truth, one who carefully analyzes
the entire Parshah will see the the text necessarily indicates
this [that they acted Le'Shem Shamayim] and it is impossible to
say otherwise.  ..."

See the continuation for the details of his closely reasoned argument
against the more salacious understanding of the story.  I don't find it
persuasive, and in any event, I'm not sure what he really accomplishes
by it, since the original question can be posed regarding many other
Biblical narratives, including many in which people have clearly done
wrong, and we would seem to be forced to accept either Rav Ya'akov's
first point, that there's nothing wrong with slandering (as opposed to
libeling) the dead, or the point made by RnTK in another post in this
thread, that the Torah's narratives are meant to teach us important
lessons, and are therefore covered under the Le'Toeles dispensation.

Yitzhak
--
Bein Din Ledin - http://bdl.freehostia.com
A discussion of Hoshen Mishpat, Even Ha'Ezer and other matters

On Mon, December 15, 2008 7:34 pm, Yitzhak Grossman wrote:
: On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 22:46:02 +1100
: "Meir Rabi" <meir...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
: ...
:> Perhaps the response was ... a matter of survival - If we allow
this to
:> go unpunished then we will certainly be seen as easy prey and attacked
:> from all quarters....

: This is exactly how Or Ha'Haim understands Shimon and Levi's
position...

Yaaqov avinu understood their position to be anger. "Ki be'apam
hareggu ish..." (Bereishis 49:7) How does that fit giving their
actions a positive / constructive spin?

SheTir'u baTov!
-micha

-- 
Micha Berger             "Man wants to achieve greatness overnight,
mi...@aishdas.org        and he wants to sleep well that night too."
http://www.aishdas.org     - Rav Yosef Yozel Horwitz, Alter of Novarodok
Fax: (270) 514-1507

On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 02:00:08 EST
T6...@aol.com wrote:

...

> AFTER Shimon and Levi killed the inhabitants of  Shechem, they took Dinah and 
> left -- IOW she was being held hostage the whole  time!  All those 
> negotiations about how Shechem loved her and wanted to  marry her and all the rest of it 
> -- were all being carried out in a hostage  situation, with Dinah already 
> having been violated in a horrible way (see Rashi)  and still being held captive. 

...

> Shechem was the ultimate spoiled  brat -- gets to kidnap and rape a young 
> girl and his father aids and abets the  crime!

RnTK takes for granted that Dinah was kidnapped and raped, but there is
actually no textual basis for these assumptions.  There is no clear
indication that any force was involved; the word 'va'ye'a'neha is
problematic, but it is far from clear that it implies force - see, e.g.,
the remarks of Rashi, Ibn Ezra and Ramban.  I have long noted that the
Torah's strikingly patriarchal narrative gives us the perspectives of
Ya'akov, his sons, and Shechem, but it is remarkably silent about
Dinah herself thought and felt during and about the entire episode, and
even about the fundamental question of whether she was seduced or raped
by Shechem.  The Torah mentions that after the initial incident,
"va'ye'daber al lev ha'na'ara" - but we are completely left in the dark
as to Dinah's response!

I had never actually known of any commentator that maintained
seduction, until this past Leil Shabbos, when I attended a talk by an
erudite Rav who mentioned this Medrash, which my father located for me
(Koheles Rabbah 10:8 [10:10]):

"Va'yikah osah, he seduced her [pitah osah] with words, as it is said
"kehu imachem devarim".  Ya'yishkav osah, be'derech erez.
Va'ye'a'neha, be'mishkav zachur."

Rav M. M. Kasher mentions this Medrash, and a couple of similar
Medrashim (Torah Sheleimah Bereishis 34:2 #8 and n. 8):

"Ein 'Kah' ela lashon pitui, ... and as it says regarding Dinah ... that
she was unwilling and they were seducing ("me'fatin") her."

"She'paisah be'devarim"

[The Rav did mention other Medrashic sources that indicate rape.]

> --Toby Katz

Yitzhak
--
Bein Din Ledin - http://bdl.freehostia.com
A discussion of Hoshen Mishpat, Even Ha'Ezer and other matters


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 25, Issue 420
***************************************

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..."