Avodah Mailing List

Volume 28: Number 115

Tue, 28 Jun 2011

• 1. Re: The Basics (Micha Berger)
• 2. Re: The Rambam and Eliyahu haNavi (Micha Berger)
• 3. Re: joseph; sale v. death (Micha Berger)
• 4. Re: Yovel (Simon Montagu)
• 5. Re: Yovel (T6...@aol.com)
• 6. Re: Yovel (Micha Berger)
• 7. Re: Consumer Alert: Minhog Scams On The Rise! (Micha Berger)
• 8. Kuf (was: Defining an Os) (Sholom Simon)
• 9. Re: The Rambam and Eliyahu haNavi (kennethgmil...@juno.com)
• 10. Re: Consumer Alert: Minhog Scams On The Rise! (Zev Sero)
• 11. more on bsamim rosh (Saul.Z.New...@kp.org)
• 12. Re: Consumer Alert: Minhog Scams On The Rise! (Micha Berger)
• 13. yovel (Eli Turkel)
• 14. Re: The Rambam and Eliyahu haNavi (Ben Waxman)
• 15. Chelkas Yaakov: Special Discount for "Rabbis" (Prof. Levine)
• 16. Rakia, Maaseh Bereishis, Halachah (Micha Berger)
• 17. Re: yovel (Zev Sero)
• 18. Re: Consumer Alert: Minhog Scams On The Rise! (Zev Sero)
• 19. Re: Consumer Alert: Minhog Scams On The Rise! (Micha Berger)

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 03:31:15PM +0000, kennethgmil...@juno.com wrote:
: I've wondered whether there was ever a time when Nidah or Kashrus
: was held in that sort of ignorance. And conversely, was there ever a
: time when a mitzvah was considered "the basics", even though it is one
: which we're not so careful about today? For example, it has often been
: said that people were much more careful about Erev Shabbos in the past,
: but even so, I don't think it was among "the basics".

RYBS's comment about the "erev Shabbos Jew" wasn't about halakhah. It
was about people having a feel for what Judaism is all about. It's not
that we were more careful in hilkhos E"Sh, but that the man on the street
could feel the anticipation of Shabbos arriving.

As I just wrote, I don't think two of those three mitzvos are particularly
basic in any halachic or hashkafic sense. They show commitment, they
are lifestyle changing, but kashrus and taharas hamishpachah are not
more central to Yahadus than geneivah, LH, talmud Torah, yishuv EY or
tzitzis (each are called "keneged kulam", although there is wheedle room
in yishuv EY bizman hazeh as long as you're not being honest about it),
tzedaqah, etc...

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             A pious Jew is not one who worries about his fellow
mi...@aishdas.org        man's soul and his own stomach; a pious Jew worries
http://www.aishdas.org   about his own soul and his fellow man's stomach.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                       - Rav Yisrael Salanter

On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 08:02:03PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote:
> At 03:02 PM 6/26/2011, R. Ben Waxman  wrote:
>> Is there any ikkar, any belief, that the Rambam holds, which are not based
>> on clear sources?

> According to Professor Marc Shapiro there are a number. Please see
> <http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/704648/Profess
> or_Marc_B._Shapiro/The_Last_Word_in_Jewish_Theology_Maimonidies%27_Thi
> rteen_Principles>The 
> Last Word in Jewish Theology? Maimonidies' Thirteen Principles

I think RMS conflates
1- whether there are sources for the belief, with whether there are sources
   for making them iqarim, and
2- whether there are sources for the iqar, with whether there are
   sources for all the non-iqar details in the Rambam's personal take
   on the basic belief.

And I think RBW conflates in his question
3- the iqarim as spelled out in Peirush haMishnayos with the less specific
   and less detailed version that became common circulation.

All of the Rambam's iqarim are beliefs that can be drawn from Chazal. Vekol
shekein the fuzzier version we generally discuss. That's not to say we can
find amora'im who say "if you don't believe X you're outside the fold" for
all 13 of them. Nor to say that the Rambam's particular take on (e.g.)
sekhar va'onesh beyond the iqar is necessarily stated by any of Chazal.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Nearly all men can stand adversity,
mi...@aishdas.org        but if you want to test a man's character,
http://www.aishdas.org   give him power.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                      -Abraham Lincoln

On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 01:37:59PM -0700, Harvey Benton wrote:
: did the brothers of joseph violate any of the halachot of holding a beis din 
: that we have? (eg, defendant standing, etc?)

They were all related to the baalei din and eidim.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 10:28 PM, Ben Waxman <ben1...@zahav.net.il> wrote:
> Rav Herzog discusses these issues. For Yovel to be noheig, all of the tribes
> have to be living here. Since that is not the case, and assuming that things
> remain the same, nor will it be, Yovel won't an issue for a long time.

Or, BEH, later today ;-) (in which case there will also be solutions
to all the questions)

From: Ben Waxman <ben1...@zahav.net.il>
>> Rav Herzog  discusses these issues. For Yovel to be noheig, all of the 
tribes 
have to be  living here. Since that is not the case, and assuming that 
things 
remain the  same, nor will it be, Yovel won't an issue for a long time.  <<

Ben
 

>>>>>>
Maybe, maybe not.  Af al pi sheyismahmeiha im kol zos achakeh lo  bechol 
yom sheyavo.
 
 


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




_____________________  







-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-a
ishdas.org/attachments/20110627/fbdd401e/attachment.html>

On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 04:21:15PM -0400, T6...@aol.com wrote:
: Maybe, maybe not.  Af al pi sheyismahmeiha im kol zos achakeh lo  bechol 
: yom sheyavo.

To repeat myself (don't worry, this is from v2n97, Dec 29, 1998:

    ... [T]he Rambam and the author of the Ani Maamin each include a
    paraphrase of the navi "vi'im tismahmeiha, chaqei lo", acknowledging
    that we must deal with the possibility that the mashiach may tarry.

    The way I would read "Ani Ma'amin" is "and even though he tarries,
    even so I daily await that he should come." I can await things
    today even though I don't expect them today. For example, I start
    anticipating birthday presents almost a week in advance, even though
    I don't expect to receive them early. (What can I tell you, I'm a
    kid. <grin>)

    Even the Chafeitz Chaim, who was known to keep a suitcase packed and
    ready for mashiach's arrival, prepared for the eventuality that he
    wouldn't arrive soon. Otherwise, why travel around collect money
    for maintaining a Yeshiva in the golah? (And if the yeshiva would
    get up and fly to EY that day, would he think it would arrive still
    needing repairs?)

    As I see it we are clearly obligated to anticipate his arrival
    daily. We MIGHT even be obligated to expect that "today might be
    the day", as the CC did. Although my very little research into the
    matter doesn't show anyone codifying this latter idea....

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             The waste of time is the most extravagant
mi...@aishdas.org        of all expense.
http://www.aishdas.org                           -Theophrastus
Fax: (270) 514-1507

On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 01:26:16AM -0400, Moshe Y. Gluck wrote:
: To elaborate upon R' Zev's question: If we believe in Hashem, we have
: already suspended our belief in a purely rational world.

I disagree. A Hashem-created world is more rational. I also think the
theist's position is more rational than a deist's -- it's more logical
to conclude there is a Creator Who can and has influenced events since
creation.

:                                                          If that is so -
: that we are allowing the supernatural into our life - then why should it
: bother us to allow more of it into our life - admitting, for example, the
: possibility of a Piska falling from heaven?

Because ha'aretz nasan livnei adam. The world exists to be a rasional
place in which we can make plans and make forecasts about their outcome.
There is no reason for a plaethora of miracles within the rationales
HQBH gave us for HIs making this place.

And lesmaaseh, if there are a lot of nissim today, they're nearly
all nissim nistarim. Why is that? And what answer will you give that
doesn't also justify assumign HQBH historically used as light a "Hand"
as possible to get the job done.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             The Maharal of Prague created a golem, and
mi...@aishdas.org        this was a great wonder. But it is much more
http://www.aishdas.org   wonderful to transform a corporeal person into a
Fax: (270) 514-1507      "mensch"!     -Rav Yisrael Salanter

> I'm not taking sides on the issue - that's for the poskim. I'm just
> wondering why a one-part kuf would be more chamur than an
> easily-recognized kuf that was made of several dots.

Probably a total tangent, but at least in some times and places kuf's were
indeed written as one-part.  See, e.g., Aleppo Codex.

-- Sholom

R' Ben Waxman asked:

> Is there any ikkar, any belief, that the Rambam holds, which
> are not based on clear sources?

Ultimately this will depend on what you mean by "clear".

Is the requirement to believe in Moshiach "based on clear sources"? Is the requirement to believe in Techias Hameisim "based on clear sources"?

My answer would be that yes, both are indeed based on sources. But no,
neither is based on *clear* sources. At least, the sources are nowhere near
as clear as those for (for example) Ikkar #5: not to pray to
anyone/anything other than Hashem.

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
57 Year Old Mom Looks 27!
Mom Reveals $5 Wrinkle Trick That Has Angered Doctors!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4e08ecb730975c18bdst02vuc

On 27/06/2011 5:02 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> And lesmaaseh, if there are a lot of nissim today, they're nearly
> all nissim nistarim.

Well, nearly all.

> Why is that? And what answer will you give that
> doesn't also justify assumign HQBH historically used as light a "Hand"
> as possible to get the job done.

Galus.

-- 
Zev Sero        If they use these guns against us once, at that moment
z...@sero.name   the Oslo Accord will be annulled and the IDF will
                 return to all the places that have been given to them.
                                            - Yitzchak Rabin

                    
                

http://jtslibrary.wordpress.com/2008/03/10/rabbinic-forgeries-part-1/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110627/421ab9e9/attachment-0001.htm>

On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 08:16:25PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
>> Why is that? And what answer will you give that
>> doesn't also justify assumign HQBH historically used as light a "Hand"
>> as possible to get the job done.
>
> Galus.

Arguable. But the peteq would have had to fall during the early bayis
sheini period -- galus Bavel or galus Yavan. So leshitaskha, and I might
even agree, I just haven't had a chance to absorb the implications, the
peteq falls on the wrong side of the line for us to assume literal miracle
claims rather than take that as the fall-back position.

BTW, do you say the same thing about stories about the the Besht and
the Lubavitcher Rabbeim? That given that they're during galus, stories
of miracles are more likely to be metaphoric than historical?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

<<Doesn't that require each tribe living in its own territory?  That
certainly won't happen until Moshiach comes.>>

Why would one assume that there are any remnants left of the 10 tribes
to bring back?
By now they are intermarried over many centuries.


-- 
Eli Turkel

From: "Micha Berger" <mi...@aishdas.org>
> And I think RBW conflates in his question
> 3- the iqarim as spelled out in Peirush haMishnayos with the less specific
>   and less detailed version that became common circulation.

> All of the Rambam's iqarim are beliefs that can be drawn from Chazal. 
> Vekol
> shekein the fuzzier version we generally discuss. That's not to say we can
> find amora'im who say "if you don't believe X you're outside the fold" for
> all 13 of them. Nor to say that the Rambam's particular take on (e.g.)
> sekhar va'onesh beyond the iqar is necessarily stated by any of Chazal.

After I sent in the question, I also felt that I wasn't clear. My question
dealt with RMB point:

- so far out he didn't need to list it,
    - so mesoretic it's not speculation, or
    - the list simply isn't an attempt to be complete?

Regarding the last two, are there other examples in the Rambam?

Regarding "so mesoretic..." what falls into that category? Mosiach ben
David isn't so mesoretic therefore the Rambam felt the need to list it
but Mosiach ben Yosef is?

Regarding "the list isn't an attempt to be complete": doesn't that go 
against the Rambam's raison d'etre for the Mishne Torah?

Ben

 From http://revach.net/article.php?id=2076

There are certain stores and utility companies, such as the telephone 
company, that had a policy to give discounts to "Rabbis".  Since it 
is forbidden for a talmid chochom to use his Torah for his own 
benefit, would it be permissible for him to take advantage of these discounts?

The Rambam in Hilchos Talmud Torah (3:10) speaks very strongly 
against a Talmud Chochom that receives money and other gifts from the 
public as a means to support himself.  He calls it a Chilul Hashem 
among other terrible things.  The Kesef Mishneh, Bach, and others 
disagree and they hold that taking presents is permissible.  Although 
in principle they agree with the Rambam, they hold that it has become 
an "Es Laasos L'ashem"; the times require a talmid chochom to live 
off the public in order to be able to learn without financial worries.

<Snip>

However warns the Chelkas Yaakov one should be careful not to pretend 
to be a talmid chochom in order to get the discount as is all to common.

----------
This brings something to mind that I heard many years ago.  The 
question was asked, "Why is it called a heter meah rabbonim and not a 
heter meah talmidei chachomim?"  The reply was, "Because meah 
rabbonim you can find easily, but meah talmidei chachomim are not so 
easy to find."  YL
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110628/d07d2861/attachment-0001.htm>

Rishonim disagree about what is the raqia' and the mayim asher mei'al
laraqia'.

Most of us know the opinion that it's a surface at the edge of the
universe, and the water above it some kind of supernal mayim. (Perhaps
"ein mayim ela Torah".) And the opinion that identifies it with the
spheres. Either of the Babylonian astronomy -- a dome that the sun goes
behind at night. Or of Greek astronomy (eg Rashi Ramban) that the stars
are embedded within and revolves around the earth. (Interestingly
the Rambam associates these with the sephiros, but the raqia' is
something else, leshitaso.)

Bereishis Rabba 4:2 speak of the raqia' congealing from a drop of
water. Based on this, the Rambam (Moreh 2:30) and Ralbag say that
raqia' is the atmosphere. Ibn Ezra reaches the same masqanah, but
via a different route. Mayim asher mei'al laraqia comes in cumulus,
stratus, nimbus, and so on.

Learning Eruvin, the thought hit me that this may have a nafqa minah
lehalakhah.

Numerous sattelites are in geostationary orbit; meaning, they orbit
the earth such that they are always over the same point. What if a
given sattelite is always over my home?

Reshus hayachid olah ad laraqia (Shabbos 52b, Eiruvin 7a).

So, whether or not that sattelite is on my reshus would depend on whether
ad laraqia is the top of the clouds, or ad infinitum. (Unless the universe
is finite, in which case...)

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             The Maharal of Prague created a golem, and
mi...@aishdas.org        this was a great wonder. But it is much more
http://www.aishdas.org   wonderful to transform a corporeal person into a
Fax: (270) 514-1507      "mensch"!     -Rav Yisrael Salanter

On 28/06/2011 7:43 AM, Eli Turkel wrote:
> <<Doesn't that require each tribe living in its own territory?  That
> certainly won't happen until Moshiach comes.>>
>
> Why would one assume that there are any remnants left of the 10 tribes
> to bring back?
> By now they are intermarried over many centuries.

Yirmiyahu brought them back.  At any rate, there must be some left,
since the nevi'im foresaw their return. E.g. the 13 gates in the third
BHMK.


-- 
Zev Sero        If they use these guns against us once, at that moment
z...@sero.name   the Oslo Accord will be annulled and the IDF will
                 return to all the places that have been given to them.
                                            - Yitzchak Rabin

                    
                

On 28/06/2011 6:20 AM, Micha Berger wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 08:16:25PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
>>> Why is that? And what answer will you give that
>>> doesn't also justify assumign HQBH historically used as light a "Hand"
>>> as possible to get the job done.
>>
>> Galus.
>
> Arguable. But the peteq would have had to fall during the early bayis
> sheini period -- galus Bavel or galus Yavan.

There was a beis hamikdash, where open miracles were seen every day.



> BTW, do you say the same thing about stories about the the Besht and
> the Lubavitcher Rabbeim? That given that they're during galus, stories
> of miracles are more likely to be metaphoric than historical?

Open miracles are not non-existent during galus, they're just rare.
Tzadikim are not personally in galus; when one reaches a level such as
"man Pnei ha'Adon da Rashbi", there is no difference between miracles
and nature.  Thus R Chanina ben Dosa could make vinegar fuel a lamp,
and the Baal Shem Tov could do the same to icicles.  But they could
only do this sort of thing in closed circles, not in public as Elisha
or Shmuel could do, because the public is in galus and can't absorb
open miracles.

-- 
Zev Sero        If they use these guns against us once, at that moment
z...@sero.name   the Oslo Accord will be annulled and the IDF will
                 return to all the places that have been given to them.
                                            - Yitzchak Rabin

                    
                

On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 01:37:44PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
>> Arguable. But the peteq would have had to fall during the early bayis
>> sheini period -- galus Bavel or galus Yavan.

> There was a beis hamikdash, where open miracles were seen every day.

So it's not about galus, it's about the absense of a beis hamiqdash?

In any case, which daily miracles happened in bayis sheini? Even the
temporary miracle of the pach shemen was only seen by the few kohanim who
were tehorim, not misyavnim, and present within the heikhal. Certainly
nothing norm setting.

If there were a neis during bayis sheini that lo ira qeri lekohein gadol
bayom yakippurim, why did they did they need to keep him up all night?

>> BTW, do you say the same thing about stories about the the Besht and
>> the Lubavitcher Rabbeim? That given that they're during galus, stories
>> of miracles are more likely to be metaphoric than historical?

> Open miracles are not non-existent during galus, they're just rare.
> Tzadikim are not personally in galus...

I didn't think people were in galus. I thought galus was a state the
Shechinah was in, which results in historical effects like the diaspora.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             We are great, and our foibles are great,
mi...@aishdas.org        and therefore our troubles are great --
http://www.aishdas.org   but our consolations will also be great.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                        - Rabbi AY Kook


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 28, Issue 115
***************************************

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..."