Avodah Mailing List

Volume 26: Number 134

Tue, 14 Jul 2009

• 1. Re: Tzeni'us and gender roles (rabbirichwol...@gmail.com)
• 2. Beis Haknesses she'll Nashim (rabbirichwol...@gmail.com)
• 3. Re: Beis Haknesses she'll Nashim (Zev Sero)
• 4. Re: tznius (T6...@aol.com)
• 5. Re: Tznius and Gender Roles (Zelig...@aol.com)
• 6. Re: Beis Haknesses she'll Nashim (rabbirichwol...@gmail.com)
• 7. Re: Rabbi Akiva erred in identifying Bar Kochba as Moshiach (Ben Waxman)
• 8. Re: Rabbi Akiva erred in identifying Bar Kochba as Moshiach (Doron Beckerman)
• 9. Re: Tzeni'us and gender roles (Chana Luntz)
• 10. Bar Mitzvah on "Early Shabbos" (Lawrence Teitelman)
• 11. Re: Tznius and Gender Roles (Yitzhak Grossman)
• 12. Re: Bar Mitzvah on "Early Shabbos" (Gershon Dubin)
• 13. Re: Tzeni'us and gender roles (Micha Berger)
• 14. Re: R Tzadok-TSBP (Micha Berger)
• 15. Re: Bar Mitzvah on "Early Shabbos" (Rich, Joel)

Micha
> I think you're conflating the real with the ideal....

I think I can support Micha's thesis with an admitedly oblique mashal..

Mashal Re: Tefillin
The ideal is to wear them all day

The reality (per AhS) is to wear them only for Q'ri'as Shema and Tefilllah.

Why? We lack goof naqi. Etc.

Q:  What about women taking on Tefillin?

A: (As per same AhS) since men should wear tefillin the absolute minimum,
so should women. And since women lack the Hiyyuv for QS and Amidah
therefore their minimum is zero.

Nimshal:
Now Plug in Men violating Tz'nius as little as possible (but not absolute
zero for practical reasons).

So since men should violate tz'nius only the absolute miunimim, therefore
the same holds for women.

KT
RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

AhS YD 240:9
Therefore .. her daughter should not stand in the "beis haknesses of
women bimkom hameyuchad l'imah"

If this BhKn shell nashim is the "ezras nashim" why not say so?

KT
RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

rabbirichwol...@gmail.com wrote:
> AhS YD 240:9
> Therefore .. her daughter should not stand in the "beis haknesses of
> women bimkom hameyuchad l'imah"
> 
> If this BhKn shell nashim is the "ezras nashim" why not say so?

Who calls it "ezras noshim"?


In many shuls the women's shul was (and still is) almost completely
closed off from the men's, with only a small window connecting them.
I've seen this in Gerrer shtiblach.


-- 
Zev Sero                      The trouble with socialism is that you
z...@sero.name                 eventually run out of other people?s money
                                                     - Margaret Thatcher

From:  Joseph Kaplan <jkap...@tenzerlunin.com>
I think you're conflating the  real with the ideal."[--RJK?]

Not conflation; I don't believe  it's the ideal.  If it were really  
the ideal, then you'd see it  in practice somewhere; you'd see RY turn  
down sidur kidushin or  reading the ketuvah or getting shlishi or  
maftir to teach us that  that's the ideal.  You'd see some rabbi  
saying it's not  important for him to introduce a speaker or make  
remarks at a dinner  to teach us that that's the ideal.  You'd see  
SOMETHING to  indicate that it's truly the ideal.  I see NOTHING  
except some  words used not to tell MEN how to behave and teach us  
what's the  ideal but to tell women not to do what halacha says they  
may  technically do. 
 


Joseph Kaplan
 
 
>>>>
 
I totally agree with you and I don't think that R' Micha is correct that it 
 is a breach of tznius for a man to accept an aliyah, be  a shaliach  
tzibbur, be a rosh yeshiva and the like ("but nebach men are forced to  do these 
unpleasant jobs because /somebody/ has to do them")  
 
Well maybe I don't /totally/ agree with you because I don't think women  
should do these jobs.  I think what is not a breach of tznius for a man  
/would/ be a breach of tznius for a woman.  I truly believe that men and  women 
are different and that the Torah reflects reality.  
 
It would not be an honor to women but a denigration of their specifically  
womanly honor to have them do the same things on a public communal level in 
the  synagogue that men do.  It be a concession to the false C and R  
premise that what women do in the home is not valuable and is somehow  not "real" 
in the same sense that what men do outside the home is valuable and  real.
 
 

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



_____________________

**************An Excellent Credit Score is 750. See Yours in Just 2 Easy 
Steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222377098x1201454399/aol?
redir=http://www.fr
eecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072&;hmpgID=62&bcd=Jul
yExcfooterNO62)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090712/d12241e8/attachment-0001.htm>

WADR to the prior posts and posters on this thread, one can find many  
definitions of roles that seem exclusionary that are based on function, as  
opposed to gender. The most simple and obvious cases would be that aYisrael  
cannot serve as a Levi and a Levi cannot serve as a Kohen. While a Zar can do  
certain acts that are not Avodah, once one enters the realm of Kehunah, 
there is  an Issur Zarus Afilu Bdieved. A Talmid Chacham, even a Mamzer is 
entitled  to more respect than a Kohen who is an Am HaAretz. The Mishnah in  
Kelim lists ten separate levels of Kedushah. There are many Psulei Edus for men  
in addition to women, who are granted a separate and special kulah in cases 
of  Agunos. Like it or not, separate but equal roles between the genders 
and even  intra-gender roles is one of the major fundamental precepts that 
divides  Halacha and, indeed. all of Orthodoxy, from the heterodox world.
 
The assumption that since the outside world has abolished or views the  
abolition of any gender differentiatons as desirable obviously requires a 
higher  level of education, Torah and secular, for any woman who chooses to or 
needs to  work anywhere, especially outside of her home, and even more  so in 
the secular world, but one can argue that that factor requires both  
adherence to Tznius at home and outside the home and that imititation of a  man's  
spiritual roles will not necessarily or even potentially enhance a  woman's 
spiritual growth. 
 
Steve Brizel
_Zeliglaw@aol.com_ (mailto:Zelig...@aol.com) 
 
 
**************An Excellent Credit Score is 750. See Yours in Just 2 Easy 
Steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222377098x1201454399/aol?
redir=http://www.fr
eecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072&;hmpgID=62&bcd=Jul
yExcfooterNO62)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090712/5279cc95/attachment-0001.htm>

Zev:
> In many shuls the women's shul was (and still is) almost completely
> closed off from the men's, with only a small window connecting them.
> I've seen this in Gerrer shtiblach.

Ein hachi nami - but specifically how did the AhS mean it? As the Gerrer
model above?
Or something else?

Litersally - it sounds like a separate women's shul! Is this what The
AhS means?

KT
RRW

When these sources say that Rav Akiva and khachamim erred, do they mean
that should have known better, they made a decision which turned out to be
wrong but there was no way that they could have known, something else
entirely?

Ben
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Doron Beckerman 

  Who says that he erred?

  Some of the prominent people:
  1) Meiri, Beis Habechira, intro to Avos s.v. Velu Hem Hanikraim
  2) Abarbanel, Yeshuos Meshicho 2:4
  3) etc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090713/83200b29/attachment-0001.htm>

I understand it as a decision that turned out to be wrong. Whether they
could have or should have known better I don't think is indicated in these
sources.

On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 7:21 PM, Ben Waxman <ben1...@zahav.net.il> wrote:

>  When these sources say that Rav Akiva and khachamim erred, do they mean
> that should have known better, they made a decision which turned out to be
> wrong but there was no way that they could have known, something else
> entirely?
>
> Ben
>
>  ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Doron Beckerman <beck...@gmail.com>
>
>  Who says that he erred?
>
> Some of the prominent people:
>  1) Meiri, Beis Habechira, intro to Avos s.v. Velu Hem Hanikraim
> 2) Abarbanel, Yeshuos Meshicho 2:4
> 3) etc
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090713/a75f61db/attachment-0001.htm>

RAM writes: 

> This halacha is in the Mechaber, Orach Chayim 53:16 - "One 
> who is not the Shatz Kavua (regular chazan) has to decline 
> somewhat before going to the amud..." The Be'er Hagolah gives 
> the source as Brachos 34, which seems to be a reference to 
> the very first lines of the new gemara near the top of 34a: 
> "A braisa: One who goes to the amud has to refuse; and if he 
> does not refuse, he is domeh l'tavshil she'ain bo melach (he 
> is like a cooked food which has no salt)." I don't recall 
> hearing this phrase ("l'tavshil she'ain bo melach") before; 
> perhaps it means that he has acted in poor taste?
> 
> Aruch Hashulchan OC 53:15 says pretty much the same thing as 
> the Mechaber did, including that if the person asking is an 
> "adam gadol", then one should not decline at all, but should 
> go right away, because one does not turn down a gadol. But 
> the Aruch Hashulchan adds this interesting point: "But for 
> something which involves sh'rirus (leadership), then one 
> should decline a bit even when a gadol is doing the asking, 
> since the declining will give the impression (d'hasiruv hu 
> mipnei she'yisraeh) that perhaps he is not fit for the task 
> (d'oolai aino ra'ui l'kach), and this is good manners (v'hu 
> haderech eretz)."

Bingo  or Eureka, or whatever you want to call it - I had completely
forgotten about this gemora, and I suspect when I learnt it I had yet to
meet my husband and the implications certainly did not strike home.

But my response on just reading your post was to turn to my husband and say
- do you realise there is a gemora source for this weird custom you lot have
about refusing seconds of food?  You see, in - well I don't know if it is
general Sephardi culture, or the Egyptian/Syrian Sephardi culture he comes
from, or general Arab culture or what - but it is desperately impolite, if
offered food (or maybe it is seconds of food, I am not quite sure) to accept
first time, you have to say no, and the hostess has to insist, and if you
are really polite, you refuse again a second time, and only take on the
third offer (although you run the risk if you do it too many times that the
hostess will not continue offering, and it can be seen as overdone, so you
have to draw a careful line).  And the family has all these hilarious
stories about going to Ashkenazi houses in circumstances where they were on
best behaviour (eg dating type scenarios) and not ending up eating anything
at all, because they were trying to show they were polite and well brought
up, and the Ashkenazi hostess had no idea and understood no to mean no.

It is clearly the same dynamic going on - if you told somebody from my
husband's community that if one accepted food straight away one was "domeh
l'tavshil she'ain bo melach", but if one refuses too much one is "dome
l'tavshil shehikdichatu melach" - they would all nod their head and say, but
of course, that is what it means to be well brought up.

> Thus, I'd like to suggest that when a person declines the 
> honor of being offered the amud, it is NOT because of tznius, 
> but because of simple humility. Humility (anavah) and modesty 
> (tznius) are very similar, but they are not identical.

So I don't think that it is even a question of anavah exactly - that is not
the dynamic going on at the Sephardi table.  I think rather it is a question
of not being seen to be greedy  - and the same must be true for the
chazan/aliya case - ie it is not problematic to eat food, but gluttony is
not a desirable trait, and neither is chasing after kavod, so a well brought
up person shows that they can wait.  Obviously though if they end up
starving, the dynamic has failed to work as it is supposed to.


> Akiva Miller

Regards

Chana

If a boy becomes Bar Mitzvah on a Shabbos, may he lead Maariv of?the "early Shabbos" which is still before shekia??

Larry Teitelman

On Sun, 12 Jul 2009 22:32:22 EDT
Zelig...@aol.com wrote:

...

> Kelim lists ten separate levels of Kedushah. There are many Psulei Edus for men  
> in addition to women, who are granted a separate and special kulah in cases 
> of  Agunos. Like it or not, separate but equal roles between the genders 

Which leniency in the area of Agunah is exclusive to women?

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

No;  can't cite the source but it's not my sevara.

Gershon
gershon.du...@juno.com

On Mon, 13 Jul 2009 05:29:17 -0700 (PDT) Lawrence Teitelman
<lteitel...@yahoo.com> writes:
> 
> If a boy becomes Bar Mitzvah on a Shabbos, may he lead Maariv of the 
> "early Shabbos" which is still before shekia? 
> 
> Larry Teitelman
> _______________________________________________
> Avodah mailing list
> Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
> http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
> 
> 
____________________________________________________________
Click here for great quotes from top international movers!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL21
41/fc/BLSrjpTMAuRWUGuuPIDGhqUc3GZwSt6hI8AkWiTCzzaZiRKgbS3Qj4kPm5S/

On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 22:52:45 GMT, RAM wrote <kennethgmil...@juno.com>:
: On first reading, I found myself in total agreement. But if so, then
: what are the gender role differences mentioned in the subject line of
: this thread?

I would argue that they're a product of men having more conflicts that
override tzeni'us. And going beyond the ideal into the real, the number
of conflicts created so many exceptions in men's lives that we developed
a tendency to ignore tzeni'us overly often even in other contexts.

: If I'm not mistaken, Chazal say somewhere that "derech haish lachzor
: achar haishah", and specifically not the other way around. What I've
: learned from my Torah teachers is that it is normal for men to be on
: the outgoing side, and for women to be more inward...

It's not just "outgoing", it's "outgoing achar ha'ishah". WADR to your
teacher, it sounds more like "guys are more likely to initiate flirting
than women".

On Sun, 12 Jul 2009 04:30:55 GMT he continues:
: This halacha, that when a man is asked to be chazan, he should initially
: decline, is well-known. But the reason for it is not so clear, and I'd
: like to suggest that it is NOT because of tznius.

: This halacha is in the Mechaber, Orach Chayim 53:16 - "One who is
: not the Shatz Kavua (regular chazan) has to decline somewhat before
: going to the amud..." The Be'er Hagolah gives the source as Brachos 34,
: which seems to be a reference to the very first lines of the new gemara
: near the top of 34a: "A braisa: One who goes to the amud has to refuse;
: and if he does not refuse, he is domeh l'tavshil she'ain bo melach (he
: is like a cooked food which has no salt)." I don't recall hearing this
: phrase ("l'tavshil she'ain bo melach") before; perhaps it means that he
: has acted in poor taste?

Actually, the Orchos Tzadiqim uses the metaphor of meat vs melakh vs
other tavlin as a means of illustrating the balance between middos.
Some, like anavah, are like meat. Others are better in smaller amounts.
It's a more nuanced metaphor than placing everything on the middah
habeinonis (Hil' Dei'os 1:4).

Simiilarly the AhS, which RAM translated as:
: Aruch Hashulchan OC 53:15 ... adds this interesting point: "But for
: something which involves sh'rirus (leadership), then one should decline a
: bit even when a gadol is doing the asking, since the declining will give
: the impression (d'hasiruv hu mipnei she'yisraeh) that perhaps he is not
: fit for the task (d'oolai aino ra'ui l'kach), and this is good manners
: (v'hu haderech eretz)."

Very much a navigation of conflicting goals, the proper middah of
tzeni'us (or anavah, see below) vs. other needs. As per the mashal of
tavshil she'ein bo melakh. I actually see these as MAKING my point
(really: my understanding of RHS's point), not refuting it.

: Thus, I'd like to suggest that when a person declines the honor of
: being offered the amud, it is NOT because of tznius, but because of
: simple humility. Humility (anavah) and modesty (tznius) are very similar,
: but they are not identical.

The line is subtle, and probably the subject of machloqes. My own opinion
is that tzeni'us is not drawing attention to oneself, more of a mode of
interaction with others, whereas anavah is realizing that one is part
of Hashem's bigger plan rather than thinking I'm in charge. (Thus the
connection to other ayin-nun words like answering, reacting, etc...)

But the line isn't my point. Whether it's an issue of tzeni'us or of
anavah, it would still mean that accomodating feminist aspirations in
the synagogue is actually enabling the further spread of middos that
don't fit the Torah's ideal.

On Sat, 11 Jul 2009 23:52:49 EDT, R Joseph Kaplan <jkap...@tenzerlunin.com>
replied to my earlier post:
:> "Again (although I think RJK submitted this before seeing my recent post),
:> I think you're conflating the real with the ideal."

: Not conflation; I don't believe it's the ideal.  If it were really
: the ideal, then you'd see it in practice somewhere...

Similarly, on Sun, 12 Jul 2009 00:16:43 EDT, R Dr Meir Shinnar
<chide...@gmail.com> wrote:
: The issue is not that we do something wrong - but that our practice
: suggests that we do not hold by that shitta.

You mean like when the CC published the book that gave him his nickname
anonymously? Or the Bahir, or the Chinukh, or the numerous other
anonymously published sefarim that were written before the author was
known for other reasons...
(<http://seforim.traditiononline.org/index.cfm/2005/11/8/Anonymous-Sefar
im>
has an interesting topic on anonymous works, acrostics, leaving the name
implied, etc...)

I think the burden of proof is actually on the suggestion that there is
another definition of tzeni'us (or anavah) that fits common practice. I
don't even know if there is a different shitah to claim we follow.

I think it's simpler to simply note that people are people, and middos
are often more neglected than chiyuvim. I don't think that actually
carries a burden of proof, being such common human nature.

....
: Similar to above.  RMB enunciates an eloquent vision of zniut.  There
: are halachot that prescribe a far less stringent version of zniut for
: kibudim - eg, as RJR describes, one could easily design a system for
: the shul that would be far closer to RMB's vision - and be easy to
: implement...

(Again, we're really tlaking about my understanding of RHS's vision.)

And I think we should at least consider it.

But here we're talking about the opposite -- a set of innovations that
overturn major fundamental mimetic issues (significant change to our
lifestyle). To invoke burden of proof again, it's one thing to say we
could be doing more; it's another to say that we should take major steps
AWAY.

...
: One could argue that this is a fault in us - but, given how this is
: widespread and adhered to by gdole yisrael mdorot,  this argument is
: problematic (again, it is essentially being motzi la'az on much of
: klal yisrael) - instead, it argues that the overarching vision of
: tzniut articulated by RMB may, after all, not be enodrsed by halacha
: (we learn hashkafa from halacha...) - and that there are competing
: principles - including the smooth running of the community - that are
: more important than zniut.

Actually, I say that exactly -- that the lifestyle halakhah and history
pushed men into gives us many conflicts between tzeni'us and other
responsibilities (many of them, like leading a minyan, are chiyuvim) and
therefore tzeni'us often loses.

Now, justify changing women's lives to embed the same decision.

RnTK <T6...@aol.com> wrote on Sun, 12 Jul 2009 20:14:42 EDT:
: I totally agree with you and I don't think that R' Micha is correct that it
: is a breach of tznius for a man to accept an aliyah, be  a shaliach
: tzibbur, be a rosh yeshiva and the like ("but nebach men are forced
: to do these unpleasant jobs because /somebody/ has to do them")

There is no baiss to this position. You're just asserting it.

On Sun, 12 Jul 2009 21:18:46 GMT RRW asked:
: There is a fellow who comes to shul on hoshana rabba with
: Hoshanas about 8-9 feet tall
: Another fellow put on tallis and Tefillin on the last 17th of Tammuz
: at mincha.
: Are these cases of lack of tznius, too?

Aren't they textbook cases of yuhara? So I would think the answer is
"definitely".

On Mon, 13 Jul 2009 15:42:49 -0400, R Yitzhak Grossman <cele...@gmail.com>
werites:
: On Sun, 12 Jul 2009 22:32:22 EDT Zelig...@aol.com wrote:
: ...
:> Kelim lists ten separate levels of Kedushah. There are many Psulei Edus for men
:> in addition to women, who are granted a separate and special kulah in cases
:> of  Agunos. Like it or not, separate but equal roles between the genders

: Which leniency in the area of Agunah is exclusive to women?

RSBrizel wrote of leniencies in eidus that are only invoked lehatir agunos.
See Hil' Geirushin 13:29, which among other things includes eidus ishah.

(Aren't all leniencies in Agunah exclusive to women, as the entire din
only applies to them?)

Rn Chana Luntz <ch...@kolsassoon.org.uk> asked on Sun, 12 Jul 2009
00:03:15 +0100 about my post:
:> An scjm regular, a Breslover fellow named R' Moshe Schorr,
:> has a signature that includes the line, "The home and family
:> are the center of Judaism,
:> *not* the synagogue." Judaism doesn't inhere in the
:> forefront, but in day to day life. That attitude is the
:> difference between viewing these innovations as empowering or
:> enabling.

: I think this is a non sequiter - ie you are raising a completely different
: topic here, that of the home and the synagogue, something which has little
: to do with our other topic regarding the definition of tznius.

I'm not as sure. I think at least one element that makes davening in a
WTG more tempting than behind the mechitzah or at home, and why being
a Maharat is a calling for someone who wants more than being an eim
habanim semeichah is this notion of the synagogue centered avodas Hashem.

And I think that too is intimately tied to confusing the role in the
limelight and the quiet service of the home. Shul worship has the
disproportionate place it does in our psyche at least in part because
it's showier.

I don't know if I'm succeeding, but I'm trying to illustrate an attitude
rather than a logical flow of argument. An attitude that emphasizes
shul worship because it's public thoroughfare worship. That some of the
spiritual dissatisfaction a woman has being on the distaff side of the
mechitzah is very much about it not having any possibilities of worship
other than besoch ami.

I think I also was lumping in the workplace and everything but the "house
of worship" with "home and family", and thus meant something different
by my citation of R' Moshe Schorr's quote line than you took it to mean.

: But let us leave that topic and get back to tznius.  You write:

...
:> I also think that Rn Jungreis should continue teaching ad
:> mei'ah ve'esrim. That was the point I was making that I think
:> got us onto the topic, so I want to reiterate it and the
:> explanation: The pros outweigh the cons -- she is very good
:> at what she does. But it IS a violation of tzeni'us. We're
:> talking about conflicting values. There is no hutrah only
:> dechuyah when it comes to mussar, since values don't
:> evaporate when in conflict like a chiyuv might.

: But you see, by defining tznius the way you do - you are not just saying
: that what Rn Jungreis does a violation of tznius (even if the pros outweigh
: the cons) you are also saying that what Moshe Rabbanu did was also a
: violation of tznius - after all, it is impossible to think of anybody who
: was more "out front" than he was....

Yes. Dechuyah.

...
: It is probably barely necessary for me to say that I think this
: understanding is dead wrong.  That is, it is not necessarily the case that a
: public role is a breach of tznius/anava etc.  That is not to say that taking
: a public role does not carry with it the *risk* that it may lead to ga'avah,
: or that it can amount to a violation of tznius, but that is precisely what
: the Torah tells us Moshe was able to avoid....

I think you're conflating tzeni'us and anavah. Someone who violates
tzeni'us for the right reason coild still be anav mikol adam, but MRAH
certainly did NOT live with an attitude of besokh amo hu yosheiv, or
vehatznei'ah lekhes im E-lokav! There was nothing betzin'ah about it!
(Even his sex life became millennia of public discourse!)

...
: Which is why I think the issue is not whether one is public or not, but
: whether one is l'shem shamayim or not.  One can do exactly the same thing
: and take exactly the same role, and if one is doing it for the kovod he or
: she will garner, then it is not l'shem shamayim and it is not tzanua
: laleches and it is all about ga'ava.  And if one is fulfilling the public
: role l'shem shamayim then one can be doing exactly the same action, and
: indeed it will be tzanua laleches.

I don't see it. Betzin'ah means "in private", and doesn't address
lishmah.

Once can say that if it's lesheim Shamayim, then the breach of tzeni'us
is justifiable, but I do not see how you can say it doesn't exist.

Again, I ask you as well to propose your definition of tzeni'us as "the
other shitah", the one we do follow, in contrast to RHS simply running
with the literal translation of the word and buttressed by other
sources.


My point here is not to raise a halachic objection to feminist
aspirations. Naniach huge swaths of territory can be halachically
finessed.

I'm asking whether it should be. Do the pros outweigh the cons?

To my mind, RRW's mashal of women and men both wearing teifllin as little
as halachically required is very apt.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             The purely righteous do not complain about evil,
mi...@aishdas.org        but add justice, don't complain about heresy,
http://www.aishdas.org   but add faith, don't complain about ignorance,
Fax: (270) 514-1507      but add wisdom.     - R AY Kook, Arpilei Tohar

On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 21:40:51 GMT, RRW <rabbirichwol...@gmail.com> wrote:
:> One doesn't need a theory of everything, but if one wants to gain the
:> most possible from the performance of mitzvos means a theory that
:> (1) gives meaning to as much of what I do as possible (measured in hours
:> and effort, not number of dinim) and (2) gives me a mission statement I
: > can actually encompass.
...
: Certain rabbanim used induction for a unified field theory and then
: tried to fit square pegs into round holes to make the theory work across
: the board.

My point was to make a chiluq between having a theory, and knowing how
the theory reaches every perat. Finding meaning for as much of my day as
possible and giving myself a clear mission statement doesn't mean
believing one is capable of making the thoeyr work across the board.

: Those who say it's all about X are distilling the Torah too far.

I obviously disagree. I think it's those who actually think they can map
everything to X who went too far. To give RRW's example:

: Even Hillel's one-legged statement ends with the caveat - "Zil Gmor!" Iow
: any encapsulation does not do the Torah Justice w/o further learning!

But he did believe it does actually encapsule the Torah, it does define
an X that it's all about.

I think of it like the physicist's dream of finding a Grand Unified
Theory (a Theory of Everything). Even if the physicist were ever to
reach it, you still couldn't reliably get from this one theory of all
of energy and matter, time and space, to the details of neurochemisty.
You still need a zil gemor because the unfolding from theory to all the
complicated details of real life is beyond us.

But Torah is Da'as Hashem, as is physics. I don't think physics will ever
be complete, nor will there ever be a perfect mapping from the Torah to a
mission statement. Approximations of the Divine Intellect, yes; but not
actually getting there. Pragmatically, living a life lishmah requires
finding that approximation, as I called it: "a mission statement I can
actually encompass." Hillel gave one approximation. The Besh"t another,
and the Gra a third. Vekhulu.

Tir'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

> 
> If a boy becomes Bar Mitzvah on a Shabbos, may he lead Maariv of the 
> "early Shabbos" which is still before shekia?
> 
> Larry Teitelman
> _______________________________________________
Wouldn't it be talui in the machloket as to whether accepting early shabbos
literally turns Friday night into shabbat or is it just accepting some
additional obligations/restrictions on Friday?
KT
Joel Rich
THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE 
ADDRESSEE.  IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL 
INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE.  Dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 
strictly prohibited.  If you received this message in error, please notify us 
immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message.  
Thank you.



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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 26, Issue 134
***************************************

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..."