Volume 30: Number 167
Fri, 07 Dec 2012
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Message: 1
From: David Riceman <drice...@optimum.net>
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2012 14:56:00 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Goebekli Tepe
RMB:
> On the matter of halakhah, R' Yosi ends up giving us a ruling about a
> hypothetical we don't find in reality.
That's just not true. R. Yosi is telling us that we may not use water
from the hot springs near Tiberias to heat up other water on Shabbat.
That's certainly something we can find in reality.
What you seem to imply is that, in fact, the hot springs near Tiberias
are not heated by the fires of hell. But that's something you know, to
the extent that you know it, only from sources external to mesorah.
> How we apply this bizman hazeh to cooking in a hot spring with current
> understanding that the heat is neither the sun's nor fire's, is a
> slightly different recurring issue -- halakhah lemaaseh and science.
But the relevant question is: do we treat the hot springs near Tiberias
differently from all other hot springs based on R. Yosi's stated
position? And that, I think, is not at all different.
> My position is that it's okay to say "I didn't understand the opinions
> of chazal, the rishonim, etc..." But I don't feel comfortable saying
> "I understood their opinions, but not one of them got the TSBP
> correct, and I, using scientific, philosophical, or other outside
> data, know better."
But don't forget the Rambam's difficulties with the existence of
mahlokes (which also applies in this particular case). Furthermore
we're discussing an issur d'rabbanan, since the apparatus was set up
before Shabbos. I think you have to ask whether R. Yosi had a tradition
that water heated by the hot springs of Tiberias are prohibited, or did
he have a tradition that the hot springs of Tiberias are heated by the
fires of hell, which he then applied to this particular case, or did he
(to combine this with another thread) propose a special gezeirah for the
hot springs of Tiberias for which he had no tradition.
Incidentally, see MN II:8-9, where the Rambam seems to do what would
make you uncomfortable.
<<Going back to whether my position stems from a correct understanding
of the second section of the Moreh, I want to look at his introductin to
pereq Cheileq
<http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=37969&;st=&pgnum=268>, the 9th
iqar emunah: The Ninth Fundamental Principle ... is the transcription.
That is, that this Torah was transcribed from Hashem yisbarakh and no
one else. And to it ONE MAY NOT ADD or remove, neither the tsb"k nor TO
THE TORAH SHEBE'AL PEH. As it says, "lo sosif alav, velo gigra mimenu."
[Devarim 13:1] We have already sufficiently explained this principle in
our introduction to this work [Peirush haMishnayos].>>
I think you are expanding TSBP way beyond what the Rambam would be
comfortable with. See his discussion of mahlokes in the first hakdamah
to the PhM. If there are two opinions, according to you, then one of
the people holding those opinions has already violated bal tosif. And
of course the Rambam himself regularly paskened mahloksim in midrashim,
contrary to your attitude.
David Riceman
Go to top.
Message: 2
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 15:12:58 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Goebekli Tepe
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 02:56:00PM -0500, David Riceman wrote:
> RMB:
>> On the matter of halakhah, R' Yosi ends up giving us a ruling about a
>> hypothetical we don't find in reality.
> That's just not true. R. Yosi is telling us that we may not use water
> from the hot springs near Tiberias to heat up other water on Shabbat.
> That's certainly something we can find in reality.
He ends up sayign that we may not use water from a spring heated
by hellfire on Shabbos. He thought that applied to Teveryah. He was
wrong. But that's not a point of halakhah, it's a point about Teveryah.
> What you seem to imply is that, in fact, the hot springs near Tiberias
> are not heated by the fires of hell. But that's something you know, to
> the extent that you know it, only from sources external to mesorah.
As I said, this is irrelevent as I don't need to hold like R' Yosi on
the hashkafic issue in order to learn halakhah from him. Doubly irrelevent
since we don't even learn the halakhah from R' Yosi -- there are chakhamim
saying he's wrong.
Rashi Bereishis 8:2 managed to find in the mesorah evidence that chamei
Teveryah indeed have a geothermal source. But now we're talking science,
not halakhah (what kinds of heating are derekh bishul) nor hashkafah
(the kind of heat gehenom has and whether gehenom can be found on earth).
Think how many rishonim found pesuqim proving that sekhar va'onesh happen
without one's body, and outside the physical plane. Obviously there are
many other sources *within* the mesorah against R' Yosi's assumption.
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger Life isn't about finding yourself
mi...@aishdas.org Life is about creating yourself.
http://www.aishdas.org - Bernard Shaw
Fax: (270) 514-1507
Go to top.
Message: 3
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2012 14:34:54 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] HaKafos (was HONORING SHABBOS LUNCH etc)
On 5/12/2012 5:51 AM, Chana Luntz wrote:
>> Whether it's dancing in the women's section, or
>> if there's not enough room then in another place, or a women's kiddush with
>> speakers, etc.
> Dancing in the
> women's section doesn't work where the women's section is the traditional
> form with a balcony and tiered steps, so for most places that is out.
So dance somewhere else. Surely there is another place available,
either in the shul building or elsewhere.
> The Yom Iyun day is another alternative. One of the shuls here in London
> (in fact, to give it context, the shul of the Rav who at the moment
> is being spoken about as the one remaining candidate for Chief Rabbi)
> flies in some women from Stern for Shmini Atzeres/Simchas Torah, who
> then give back to back divrei torah - a la Shavuos night, but for women
> and mostly during the day. In a lot of ways it is a nice idea - but,
> it doesn't feel like Simchas Torah, it feels like a kind of Shavuos.
So make it different from Shavuos. Not so serious and academic. On
Simchas Torah we celebrate with a closed sefer, not an open one, which is
why I suggested a kiddush with an entertaining speaker or two, and group
singing, and some dancing if there's room. Save the serious divrei torah
for Shavuos.
--
Zev Sero "Natural resources are not finite in any meaningful
z...@sero.name economic sense, mind-boggling though this assertion
may be. The stocks of them are not fixed but rather
are expanding through human ingenuity."
- Julian Simon
Go to top.
Message: 4
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 15:22:26 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Is there a Reshus Harabim D'oraysa nowadays?
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 02:16:57PM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
> On 6/12/2012 10:10 AM, Akiva Miller wrote:
>> halacha can and does change when the poskim say so. We do melacha so
>> early on Saturday night that those of earlier generations would be
>> absolutely appalled. And*we* would be similarly appalled to see how late
>> *they* did melacha on Friday.
>
> And either they were right or we are. We can't both be right...
Eilu va'eilu diverei Elokim Chaim -- maybe we can.
But within each "eilu", you need consistency. So either RHR is rare and
it requires 600K people, or it is common because it doesn't require 600K
people. Either hold like Ulla or not.
> The definitions
> of day and night didn't change when the majority of poskim changed.
I disagree. Because eilu va'eilu, halakhah is not about who is correct,
but how to legislate according to the rules of halakhah. And since
consensus can change, the definitions can change.
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger In the days of our sages, man didn't sin unless
mi...@aishdas.org he was overcome with a spirit of foolishness.
http://www.aishdas.org Today, we don't do a mitzvah unless we receive
Fax: (270) 514-1507 a spirit of purity. - Rav Yisrael Salanter
Go to top.
Message: 5
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2012 14:16:57 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Is there a Reshus Harabim D'oraysa nowadays?
On 6/12/2012 10:10 AM, Akiva Miller wrote:
> My apologies. My admittedly-extreme guess was based mostly on the very
> odd lack of explanations of WHY there is no reshus harabim nowadays.
> Many poskim make this assertion with no explanation whatsoever, and
> this is compounded when later poskim quote them unquestioningly.
Which posek makes this assertion with no explanation? I have never
seen it made anywhere, except as a note on the requirement for 600K.
That *is* the explanation. RHR (according to these rishonim) requires
600K, and "nowadays" "we" have no such thing. "Achshav ein lanu".
> In other words: If Posek ABC claims that "there is no reshus harabim
> nowadays", then I am willing and eager to accept that p'sak for the time
> in which he lived, and for the places with which he is familiar.
Of course. When and where else could he have meant? What can "achshav"
and "lanu" mean *but* the writer's own time and people, as he understands
them?
> But it leaves me in a barren quandary when I want to know the halacha
> for other times and other places.
How so? If there is a place with 600K and the other criteria of RHR, then
it is a RHR even according to this shita; if there is not, then it isn't.
> Some have made the claim that a number of reshuyos harabim DO exist today.
> It seems to me that they can do this only if they either (A) disagreeing
> with the other poskim (which they*are* entitled to do, but their credibility
> would be enhanced if they'd point out the precise points of disagreement),
> or (B) by claiming that the earlier p'sak no longer applies (in which case
> they*must* specify exactly which circumstances have changed.
Again, what are you missing? Every assertion that there are today
RHR even according to this shita, is always accompanied by a specific
assertion that place A or B has 600K, by whatever definition the person
making the assertion provides. E.g. RMF says that the 600K must all be in
the streets of a city at one time, but not necessarily in the same street,
and one can assume that there will be times when 20% of the population
will be out, so any place with a population over 3M qualifies, and since
(he has been told) both Manhattan and Brooklyn have such populations,
they qualify, assuming the other criteria are also met. Another person
might say that they must all be on the same road, but people in cars
count, and X Rd has 400K vehicles drive down it on a busy travel day,
and we can assume an average of at least 1.5 people per vehicle,
and therefore it qualifies. Others may say that no, people in cars
don't count, or the study is flawed, and therefore that street or city
is not a RHR according to this shita. But *nobody* *ever* says "it
can't be a RHR because the poskim said we haven't got any nowadays".
Everyone agrees that if a place fits the criterion, however defined,
then it is no longer the "achshav" in which "lanu" have no RHR.
On 6/12/2012 10:10 AM, Akiva Miller wrote:
> ON THE OTHER HAND, despite RZS's comment that
>> Either 600K is a requirement or it isn't.
> halacha can and does change when the poskim say so. We do melacha so
> early on Saturday night that those of earlier generations would be
> absolutely appalled. And*we* would be similarly appalled to see how late
> *they* did melacha on Friday.
And either they were right or we are. We can't both be right. If our
shita is right, then it was always right, and theirs was wrong; that's why
we have to follow it, and can't defer to what they did. If they disagreed
with us, and thought they were right, then they had to do what they did
and couldn't defer to us. But only one of us is right. The definitions
of day and night didn't change when the majority of poskim changed.
--
Zev Sero
z...@sero.name
Go to top.
Message: 6
From: saul newman <newman...@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 12:46:22 -0800
Subject: [Avodah] source?
>>>Did Matisyahu realize
that he and his tiny group of Talmidei Chachomim would bring down the
Greek Army?
what is the source that the macabees were talmidei chachamim?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20121206/148ad1a3/attachment-0001.htm>
Go to top.
Message: 7
From: "Prof. Levine" <llev...@stevens.edu>
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2012 16:36:38 -0500
Subject: [Avodah] More on Giving Gifts on Chanukah
Apparently not everyone agrees with what Hakhel sent out today about
giving gifts on Chanukah, namely,
>GIFTS? HaRav Ezriel Erlanger, Shlita, points out that one of the
>greatest lessons Yaakov Avinu taught us in his encounter with Eisav
>was to avoid Eisav and that which he represents to the greatest
>extent possible. Yaakov did not seek to be hurt by Eisav, nor did
>he seek his friendship. HaRav Erlanger continued that while
>Chanukah Gelt is a holy minhag, the concept of Chanukah gifts is one
>that is taken from Eisav--and one that we must avoid.
The following is from http://tinyurl.com/ar67szt
Question:
Where is the makor in minhagim seforim or even Halacha to give gifts
on Chanuka?
I strongly believe it is none other than chukas hagoyim one hundred percent.
Chanukah gelt perhaps has a source, however, this business of giving
gifts? Where does that originate from?
I am hoping that perhaps you can change my opinion.
Answer:
The Poskim discuss this and conclude that it isn't a problem of
Chukas HaGoyim, as in all likelihood the Goyim's minhag of giving
gifts on their holidays was taken from us and not vice versa. (See
Emes L'Yaakov from HaRav Yaakov Kamenetsky Zatzal Siman 670 in the footnote.)
The Ponovezh Rav, Rav Yosef Shlomo Kahaneman Zatzal said that after
the Greeks forbade the Jewish children from learning Torah, their
parents had to "bribe" them with gifts to get them to learn once again.
Giving gifts on Chanukah commemorates that aspect of the Chanukah
miracle. Indeed, children should be told when receiving gifts that it
is for this reason and that they are expected to increase their Torah
learning because of the gifts. (See Sifsei Chaim from Rav Chaim
Friedlander Zatzal; Moadim Vol. 2 page 134)
See also Shu"t Avnei Yashfeh Vol. 1 Siman 129:2 and Sha'arei Halacha
U'Minhag Vol. 2 page 283
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20121206/feea33d6/attachment-0001.htm>
Go to top.
Message: 8
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2012 22:27:33 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] More on Giving Gifts on Chanukah
On 6/12/2012 4:36 PM, Prof. Levine wrote:
> *
> The Poskim discuss this and conclude that it isn't a problem of Chukas
> HaGoyim, as in all likelihood the Goyim's minhag of giving gifts on
> their holidays was taken from us and not vice versa. (See Emes
> L'Yaakov from HaRav Yaakov Kamenetsky Zatzal Siman 670 in the
> footnote.)
How would they have got it from us, since we never had such a custom?
Their custom is officially based on the story of the "three wise men",
and in reality probably derives from the Roman custom of giving gifts
at Saturnalia.
> (See Emes L'Yaakov from HaRav Yaakov Kamenetsky Zatzal Siman 670 in the footnote.)
hebrewbooks.org has several volumes of Emes L'Yaakov on gemara, but none
on halacha.
> The Ponovezh Rav, Rav Yosef Shlomo Kahaneman Zatzal said that after
> the Greeks forbade the Jewish children from learning Torah, their
> parents had to "bribe" them with gifts to get them to learn once
> again.
What is the makor for this? And if it's true why do we not have any
tradition of giving gifts on Chanukah (as opposed to money, for which we
do have a tradition)? Remember, this isn't about giving, it's davka about
gifts, which is a specific Xmas custom.
> (See Sifsei Chaim from Rav Chaim Friedlander Zatzal; Moadim Vol. 2 page 134)
This isn't on hebrewbooks.org either
> See also Shu"t Avnei Yashfeh Vol. 1 Siman 129:2
The question there is about money, not gifts, though in his answer he
permits gifts too.
> and Sha'arei Halacha U'Minhag Vol. 2 page 283
This mentions nothing about gifts *or* money, but only that there is an
opinion that there's a mitzvah of simcha on Chanukah.
--
Zev Sero "Natural resources are not finite in any meaningful
z...@sero.name economic sense, mind-boggling though this assertion
may be. The stocks of them are not fixed but rather
are expanding through human ingenuity."
- Julian Simon
Go to top.
Message: 9
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2012 22:30:44 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] source?
On 6/12/2012 3:46 PM, saul newman wrote:
>>>>Did Matisyahu realize
> that he and his tiny group of Talmidei Chachomim would bring down the
> Greek Army?
>
> what is the source that the macabees were talmidei chachamim?
"Beyad oskei toratecha". And 2000 years of Jewish tradition; whence
the hava amina that they were not?
--
Zev Sero "Natural resources are not finite in any meaningful
z...@sero.name economic sense, mind-boggling though this assertion
may be. The stocks of them are not fixed but rather
are expanding through human ingenuity."
- Julian Simon
Go to top.
Message: 10
From: "Akiva Miller" <kennethgmil...@juno.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 20:54:27 GMT
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Rabbis say observant Jews can eat in secular
Prof. Levine wrote:
> I think that people who are not observant will understand
> since they do not keep kosher, then religious people will
> not eat in their homes. I fail to see "You can eat with me
> but I can't eat at your place" being insulting. It is simple
> a fact of life.
To you, I suppose so. But to *them*, it is far from a simple fact of life.
Many of them, for example, simply do not understand the concept of
"forbidden" or "obligated". They often see halacha not as law, but as
social or cultural choices. They are genuinely incredulous when they ask,
quite sincerely, "You mean you *never* cheat? Can't you *ever* make an
exception? What would happen if you did?"
I could write more, but it would merely detract from what I've already said.
Akiva Miller
____________________________________________________________
Woman is 53 But Looks 25
Mom reveals 1 simple wrinkle trick that has angered doctors...
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/50c1063b851c163b446dst01vuc
Go to top.
Message: 11
From: "Prof. Levine" <llev...@stevens.edu>
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2012 16:53:16 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Rabbis say observant Jews can eat in secular
At 03:37 PM 12/6/2012, Ben Waxman wrote:
>I don't know when the discussion stops being Avodahish and become
>Areivimish. I'll rely on the moderators.
>
>On 12/6/2012 8:24 PM, Prof. Levine wrote:
>>
>>I think that people who are not observant will understand since
>>they do not keep kosher, then religious people will not eat in
>>their homes. I fail to see "You can eat with me but I can't eat at
>>your place" being insulting. It is simple a fact of life.
>BW: Yes, they can be insulted (and are) when they say to you "just
>tell me what you need and I'll take care of it" and the dati answer
>is "I can't trust you". I've been in this very situation and seen
>people get very insulted.
My answer would not be "I can't trust you" but a detailed list of
what is required. If the person were to follow it, then I see no
problem. Truth be told, I have been in this situation with some
observant people who are aware that I have "unusual" kashrus
standards, They asked me for guidelines, I gave them, and we went to
their home and ate. It was Seudah Shlishis, so things were cold and
milchigs. They were not at all insulted.
>>Then how is one supposed to know that the food was bought from a
>>place that has reliable hashgacha? Is the secular person supposed
>>to show the religious person the sales slip and kashrus
>>certificate? Is he or she not supposed to break the seals until
>>the religious person arrives. All of this does not sound to me like
>>it will make for Achdus.
>BW: Again, you're using words the authors didn't use. You keep
>saying "reliable hashgacha" when I have no doubt that if the secular
>guy were to say "I bought the meat at the local Mega (a chain with
>rabbinate heksher") that would be enough for them. And again, they
>advised against eating home cooked food unless you can verify a lot
>of information. But they are assuming that if you ask and check and
>discuss, you can trust your secular friend's information. If he says
>that he bought it (whatever it is) at the Mega, you don't have to
>worry that he's lying and really he went to the treif butcher shop.
>That is their real chiddush.
>>
>>There is another issue here to keep in mind - Tzinius. What if the
>>secular lady of the house is wearing a sleeveless and/or low cut
>>dress or blouse. What are the men supposed to do about making a
>>bracha or, indeed, even looking at her. Is this issue dealt with.
>>(Note that I did not mention if her hair is uncovered, because I
>>assume that they would tell you to rely on the heter of the Aruch HaShulchan.)
>BW: People who don't want to look at secular women shouldn't leave
>the vast majority of neighborhoods. Certainly they can't work in
>many industries.
It is making a bracha that is the problem. YL
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20121206/0643486d/attachment-0001.htm>
Go to top.
Message: 12
From: Ben Waxman <ben1...@zahav.net.il>
Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2012 07:29:40 +0200
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Rabbis say observant Jews can eat in secular
On 12/6/2012 11:53 PM, Prof. Levine wrote:
>
> My answer would not be "I can't trust you" but a detailed list of
> what is required. If the person were to follow it, then I see no
> problem.
So there you go. The only difference between you and Beit Hillel is the
number of requirements. They give a list that is (probably) shorter with
more qulot.
>>
> It is making a bracha that is the problem. YL
BW: That would still a problem if she came to your house. What do you do
then when she comes to your house in a low cut dress?
Ben
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20121207/950b68b3/attachment-0001.htm>
Go to top.
Message: 13
From: Lisa Liel <l...@starways.net>
Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2012 07:48:49 -0600
Subject: Re: [Avodah] source?
On 12/6/2012 9:30 PM, Zev Sero wrote:
> On 6/12/2012 3:46 PM, saul newman wrote:
>>>>> Did Matisyahu realize
>> that he and his tiny group of Talmidei Chachomim would bring down the
>> Greek Army?
>>
>> what is the source that the macabees were talmidei chachamim?
>
> "Beyad oskei toratecha". And 2000 years of Jewish tradition; whence
> the hava amina that they were not?
Oskei toratecha doesn't equate to talmid chacham. And if you go by al
ha-nissim, you'd have to say that the Maccabees were "weak", which seems
contrary to what we know about them. And if you say they were weak
compared to the Greeks and Hellenists, then they were also oskei
toratecha compared to the Greeks and Hellenists.
This strikes me as no different than how we know that Yaakov Avinu wore
a black hat. After all, it says "vayetzei Yaakov", and surely he
wouldn't have gone out without a black hat.
Lisa
Go to top.
Message: 14
From: Eli Turkel <eliturkel%gmail....@aishdas.org>
Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2012 12:08:16 +0200
Subject: [Avodah] Rabbis say observant Jews can eat in secular homes
> I have no idea what being attuned to the public means nor do I know
> what part of the public R. Neubert is referring to. It seems to me
> from what I read the being "attuned to the public" trumps halacha.
I attended a shiur last night by R. Moshe Lichrenstein on modern
orthodoxy. In the question period he was asked about the statements
from the Bet Hillel organization. His response was that he didnt know the
details of the psak. However, his general observation was that one would
frequently get much greater kulot from charedi rabbis. The difference
is that a charedi rabbi would give this psak in private while publicly
suggesting that one avoid the problem while a MO rabbi or organization
would give the psak in a very public manor.
It was quite clear that gedolim like RYSE was on the machmir side on
almost all major public issues, including issues like IVF,. It seems that
in many individual cases he was much more mekil than his public stance.
In the halacha yomit from ROY in a recent issue ROY strongly advises
against having nonreligious Jews as guests when one is required to give
them some snacks and they won't make a bracha. As many shas members are
very involved in public affairs and this issue must come up frequently I
would not be surprised that in practice he is more mekil than the public
psak that only relies a CI in extenuating circumstances.
In any case it is clear from the psakim of RSZA, ROY, CI and others
that indeed being attuned to the public and avoidung a chillul hashem
is indeed part of halacha
--
Eli Turkel
------------------------------
Avodah mailing list
Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
End of Avodah Digest, Vol 30, Issue 167
***************************************
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..."