Avodah Mailing List

Volume 33: Number 24

Wed, 11 Feb 2015

• 1. Re: Safeik as Metzi'us (Kenneth Miller)
• 2. Re: Safeik as Metzi'us (Micha Berger)
• 3. bet yosef algorithm (Eli Turkel)
• 4. Re: bet yosef algorithm (Micha Berger)
• 5. torah only (Eli Turkel)
• 6. Re: torah only (Micha Berger)
• 7. Re: Safeik as Metzi'us (Kenneth Miller)
• 8. Re: Safeik as Metzi'us (Micha Berger)
• 9. Re: bet yosef algorithm (Rich, Joel)
• 10. steps up to the menorah (Ben Waxman)
• 11. Rabbenu Tam (Eli Turkel)
• 12. Re: steps up to the menorah (Zev Sero)
• 13. Re: steps up to the menorah (Kenneth Miller)
• 14. Re: steps up to the menorah (Micha Berger)
• 15. Revealing the Nakedness (Kenneth Miller)
• 16. Re: steps up to the menorah (Zev Sero)

R' Micha Berger wrote:

> I never understood the Brisker reluctance to wear tzitzis in a
> rh"r (and they don't use community eiruvin, so that means most
> streets). The mishnah says that tekheiles einah me'aqeves es
> halavan, and they are concerned that perhaps the gemara
> concludes otherwise. And if the tassle of 8 lavan strings is
> not a fulfillment of tzitzis, it is not bateil to the garment,
> and wearing it would be hotza'ah.
>
> It's not the possibility that we're not yotzei that bothers me,
> but the second bit.

You're looking at it in terms of a safek on whether or not we're mekayem
the mitzvah. From that angle, I'm stumped too. But in your final paragraph,
you phrased it just a bit differently:

> So why would wearing white tzitzis, or for that matter any safeiq
> pasul tzitzis, outside an eiruv [you would use] be any different?

You've shifted the focus from a safek kiyum mitzvah, to a safek oiver
aveirah. Perhaps the reluctance is not merely of wearing such tzitzis in a
reshus harabim -- Perhaps there is a reluctance to wear such tzitzis AT
ALL. After all, if the tzitzis are pasul, then it is assur to wear the
beged even during the week!

Perhaps they make a cheshbon that for the relatively minor mitzvos and
aveiros of tzitzis, there is room to rely on those who hold that white
tzitzis are kosher. But when Meleches Shabbos is added into the mix, the
stakes are higher and those poskim are not enough to rely on.

This logic becomes even stronger when one considers that the Hotzaah of
such tzitzis would be D'Oraisa (for those who hold our streets to be a
reshus harabim), but on Shabbos, the mitzvah of tzitzis is only d'Rabanan,
which puts the whole issue (almost) into "yatza s'charo b'hefsedo"
territory. Why risk violating Shabbos, when the most you'll get out of it
is a kiyum d'rabanan?

(For those who are surprised by my assertion that tzitzis is only d'rabanan
on Shabbos, see our thread from 2001 titled "Tzitzis on Shabbos -
d'Rabanan?" at http://tinyurl.com/m7kpbp8)

Akiva Miller
KennethGMil...@juno.com


____________________________________________________________
Next Apple Sensation
1 little-known path to big profits
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/54d94bb7441084bb531fbst01vuc

On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 12:06:43AM +0000, Kenneth Miller wrote:
: > It's not the possibility that we're not yotzei that bothers me,
: > but the second bit.

: You're looking at it in terms of a safek on whether or not we're
: mekayem the mitzvah...
: You've shifted the focus from a safek kiyum mitzvah, to a safek oiver
: aveirah...

I was internally unclear on this point -- whether one may wear a 4
cornered garment when making tzitzis is impossible (eg you need techeiles
and you believe we don't know how to make it) -- because it's really
tangential. I think the Briskers would have to hold you may, or else
the common practice and textual pesaq of wearing a tallis would prove
that everyone holds its mutar. (Tallis qatan is more complicated;
might be patur as an undergarment. The Mordechai calls it a minhag,
not qiyum deOraisa.)

My point is hard to articulate, which is why I made each step of my
argument in two or three different phrasings. Let me try another:

Whether or not tzitzis are tafeil to the garment for the sake of hotza'ah
relates to whether or not I should wear them, not whether or not they're
kosher.

The difference? I live in a reality after pesaq, not the world of sevara.
So, given that the safeiq means I have to wear the tassles. Now, once
I have to, why aren't they beteilim to the garment?

And isn't that the line of reasoning in eiruv chatzeiros? Once the safeiq
means I can't eat the maybe-treif meat, or the pretend safeiq of sefeiqa
deyoma means I can't reach the meat, the meat is unusable for the eiruv.

Even in the latter case, where the need for the eiruv is on the other side
of the commemorated safeiq! (I can't reach the meat "if" the YT is the
first day, I need the eiruv for the 2nd day only "if" it's the second.)

I do not see why chiyuv vs issur would be relavent to the point I'm trying
to make. I see it more as safeiq in reasoning vs the definitiveness of
pesaq when I take the situation to start pasqening another din.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Every child comes with the message
mi...@aishdas.org        that God is not yet discouraged with
http://www.aishdas.org   humanity.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                   - Rabindranath Tagore

:> I thought that the BY's head-count was not on the pesaq level, but on
:> the sugya level. 2 out of 3 authorities' theoretical bases, not pesaqim.

>>I acknowledge that this version of the SA's rule involves considerably
more contribution from the mechaber to decide sevaros when not provided
from which to decide which machloqesin implicitly touch other dinim.
But I saw that as evidence of the accuracy of this version. It gives us
a reason why it can look to others that he violated his own rule in one
instance or another. >>

However the great difficulty is that many times the theoretical basis of
the Rambam is not clear and is controversal. This would imply that the
basis of the SA is not so much the bet yosef but rather the kesef mishna.

In any case in most cases the SA quotes the RTambam word for word implying
that it is the psak and not the svara that counts

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20150210/eb4f6efd/attachment-0001.htm>

On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 09:47:34AM +0200, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote:
: In any case in most cases the SA quotes the RTambam word for word implying
: that it is the psak and not the svara that counts

If that were true, why write a Beis Yoseif and not cut straight to
the SA?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

> Is it not of value to know what authentic Torah leaning is? This has
> nothing to do with "the One True Derech." R. Katz brings many sources
> from rishonim and achronim to back up his thesis that the goal of
> Torah learning is to lead to perfection of character. It won't be
> Torah only if it is not Torah, will it? Isn't knowing what torah
> learning is supposed to be about of great value?

Certainly the Briskers would not agree

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20150210/1f99738d/attachment-0001.htm>

On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 09:42:14AM +0200, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote:
: > Is it not of value to know what authentic Torah leaning is? This has
: > nothing to do with "the One True Derech." R. Katz brings many sources
: > from rishonim and achronim to back up his thesis that the goal of
: > Torah learning is to lead to perfection of character. It won't be
: > Torah only if it is not Torah, will it? Isn't knowing what torah
: > learning is supposed to be about of great value?

: Certainly the Briskers would not agree

I presume they would, following NhC 4:4. If you take it prescriptively,
it says that TOrah is like immersion in a miqvah, it is metaheir you from
such flaws in and of itself. Thus eliminating the need for Mussar or any
conscious effort to correct character -- shtaigin in learning alone will
metaphysically straighten you out. But the goal is the same whether you're
Yeshivish or a Mussarnik. As the Gra (or the editor of Even Sheleimah)
puts it, "Explaining all the ways of breaking the middos ra'os in general,
for that is the shoresh of all of avodas H' yisbarakh." They disagree
dratically on strategy. But "perfection of character" is indeed the goal.

I would argue that it's more consistent with the rest of the book
(the existence of the first two she'arim, not to mention the thesis
of sha'ar 3 [but only as I understand it] and the "chapters" [not just
me]) to assume the description is descriptive: What is real talmud
Torah? Not the accumulation of Torah fact, but the internalization of
them in a battle against the yh"r (the topic of the chapters). And
thus if someone is learning and their character isn't improving, they
aren't learning right. Conscious attention is indeed needed.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Nothing so soothes our vanity as a display of
mi...@aishdas.org        greater vanity in others; it makes us vain,
http://www.aishdas.org   in fact, of our modesty.
Fax: (270) 514-1507              -Louis Kronenberger, writer (1904-1980)

R' Micha Berger wrote:

> Whether or not tzitzis are tafeil to the garment for the
> sake of hotza'ah relates to whether or not I should wear
> them, not whether or not they're kosher.
>
> The difference? I live in a reality after pesaq, not the
> world of sevara. So, given that the safeiq means I have
> to wear the tassles. Now, once I have to, why aren't they
> beteilim to the garment?

In questions of Psik Reisha, one cannot argue for "Lo Nicha Lay" on the
grounds that he doesn't want to violate Shabbos. Rather, "what one wants"
is judged in more practical, ordinary terms. Perhaps here too.

Notice the phrases "I should wear", "I have to wear". now let me ask you: Do you really WANT to wear them? Or are they a burden?

Let's remember that we're discussing the tzitzis, not the begged. One could
easily argue that a genuine beged may be worn in its usual manner even in
objectionable circumstances, such as a heavy raincoat on a hot dry day. But
the tzitzis themselves are not a begged; at best they are a tachshit to
enhance the begged. And that's somewhat trickier.

What's the halacha for a tachshit which I personally find burdensome? Let's
say that my wife insists that I'll look like an idiot if there's no feather
in my hat, but I'm an animal rights activist who feels very uncomfortable
wearing a genuine feather. May I go out with the feather or not?

Offhand, I don't recall the halacha there, but even if *my* seforim say it's okay, what would the *Briskers* hold?

Akiva Miller


____________________________________________________________
The #1 Worst Carb Ever?
Click to Learn #1 Carb that Kills Your Blood Sugar (Don't Eat This!)
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/54da0b28152c3b275178st01vuc

On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 01:43:29PM +0000, Kenneth Miller via Avodah wrote:
: What's the halacha for a tachshit which I personally find
: burdensome? Let's say that my wife insists that I'll look like an idiot
: if there's no feather in my hat, but I'm an animal rights activist who
: feels very uncomfortable wearing a genuine feather. May I go out with
: the feather or not?

I still don't see a parallel, but I have nothing to add on that which
wouldn't be repeating myself. To address this question:

I would assume you may. If you choose to wear the feather, it's because
your desire for shalom bayis, for not looking like an idiot, or whatever,
outweights your animal rights activism. In total, you want to wear it.

If you want to ask about a feather you're only wearing because kofin
oso ad sheyomar rotzeh ani... That would be different!

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             The mind is a wonderful organ
mi...@aishdas.org        for justifying decisions
http://www.aishdas.org   the heart already reached.
Fax: (270) 514-1507

>> the BY's head-count was not on the pesaq level, but on
>> the sugya level. 2 out of 3 authorities' theoretical bases, not pesaqim.

>> I acknowledge that this version of the SA's rule involves considerably
>> more contribution from the mechaber to decide sevaros when not provided
>> from which to decide which machloqesin implicitly touch other dinim.

> However the great difficulty is that many times the theoretical basis of
> the Rambam is not clear and is controversal. This would imply that the
> basis of the SA is not so much the bet yosef but rather the kesef mishna.

Perhaps an example would help. In O"C 70 the beit Yosef quotes the Rif
and Rambam and Rosh on whether a chatan can be machmir on himself and
say krait shma, he provides reasons as to why they paskined as they did
based on how they saw the rules of psak in the machloket between the
tanna kamma and Rashbag. While he may be correct in his explanation, they
clearly never stated how they arrived at their psak and his explanation
would have impact in other cases of machloket.

BTW see S"A O"C 70:3 for where the final psak falls

KT
Joel Rich

At the end of parshat Yitro is the famous pasuk about the mizbei'ach 
having a ramp and not steps, to make sure that no one views the cohen's 
nakedness. Yet my 7 YO asked me why do all the pictures of the menorah 
(at least in her books) show a cohen standing on steps or on a ladder?  
I didn't have an answer.

Ben

>> Rabbenu Tam was a wealthy financier and a personal friend of the Governor
>> of the province.

> And they know this how?  What is the source? >>

1) There is a teshuva from Rabbenu Tam to the head of Champagne

R. Reiner Rabbenu Tam and Henri Count of Champagne in: collection of
articles commemorating I. Ta-Shma institute for jewish studies hebrew
university jerusalem 2005

(I have a copy - Hebrew if anyone wants it)

2) The Rosh writes that Rabbenu Tam made silver finger (like a shoe)
for his hawk so that the hawk would not treif what he captured.
see shitah mekubezet chulin manuscript Moscow 946 page 160b and also
tosafot haRosh Chullin From A. Lichtenstein p264 footnote 527 (from the
article of Reiner above)

only the rich had personal hawks !!


[Email #2]

For those who want to see a more in depth discussion of Rabbenu Tam and
hawking in the medieval ages see
http://www.oqimta.org.il/oqimta/5773/jacobi1.pdf
(some 80 pages in English)


[Email #3]

It seems that the quote I gave on Rabbenu Tam using hawks is subject to
debate about its authenticity

As to the work of Rabbenu Tam we have

According to Israel Ta-Shma: R. Tam lived in Ramerupt where he engaged
in moneylending and viticulture, typical occupations of the Jews there
at that time, and became well-to-do. His business affairs brought him
into contact with the nobility and the authorities, who occasioned him
much trouble. To a great extent his attitude toward non-Jews in various
halakhic questions was conditioned by his direct contact with them

-- 
Eli Turkel

On 02/10/2015 03:44 PM, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote:
> At the end of parshat Yitro is the famous pasuk about the mizbei'ach
> having a ramp and not steps, to make sure that no one views the
> cohen's nakedness. Yet my 7 YO asked me why do all the pictures of
> the menorah (at least in her books) show a cohen standing on steps or
> on a ladder? I didn't have an answer.

There was never any concern that anyone will view the cohen's nakedness,
because he's wearing a long tunic.  The only concern is that the stones
of the kevesh should not "see" his nakedness.  But see Rashi on the pasuk
in Yisro, who points out that the stones aren't going to "see" anything
anyway, because he's wearing shorts.  The concern is that it will *look*
like they're seeing his nakedness, because he is visibly lifting his
knees to climb them.   The stepping stone in front of the menorah is not
a keli shares, it has no kedusha, so there's no reason it shouldn't
(appear to) "see" his nakedness, any more than the ground he walks on.

R' Zev Sero wrote:

> The only concern is that the stones of the kevesh should not "see"
> his nakedness. ...
> The stepping stone in front of the menorah is not a keli shares, it
> has no kedusha, so there's no reason it shouldn't (appear to) "see"
> his nakedness, any more than the ground he walks on.

I think what you're saying is that the kevesh Is a kli shareis, while the
steps to the menorah is NOT a kli shareis. If correct, it makes sense and
answers the question, but is this distinction a real one? At first glance,
they both have similar functions and ought to have similar halachos.

As I read and reread that pasuk and that Rashi, I find myself getting
confused. Is the kevesh part of the mizbe'ach, or is it something separate?
The pasuk says not to use steps to get to the mizbe'ach, so that the
nakedness is not revealed "alav - on it". What is the "it" referring to? Is
"it" the kevesh, or the mizbe'ach?

If "it" is the mizbe'ach itself, then I see no problem with using stairs,
especially if the top step is at the same height as the mizbe'ach, because
all of the "revealing" will have stopped when the kohen reaches the
mizbe'ach itself. So "it" must refer to "the thing you get to get up to the
mizbe'ach", which must be a ramp, because stairs are being forbidden.

But if this hakpadah is not only for the mizbe'ach itself, but even for the
thing you use to get up to the mizbe'ach, what makes the kevesh more
sensitive to tznius than any other part of the mishkan, such as the stairs
by the menorah? RZS may have shown the distinction: A kli shareis is more
sensitive to tznius than other objects.

What defines the kevesh as a kli shareis? I don't know. But when I looked
in my notes, I saw nothing about steps up to the menorah. I did see that
the menorah was 18 tefachim in height, and that (3 amos) is a typical human
height. Is it possible that the reason why the menorah steps don't count as
a kli shareis, is because it is not mentioned in the Torah? Could those
steps be a mere convenience device provided for kohanim who were shorter
than average, and that's why it is exempt from this hakpada? (Or maybe the
steps to the menorah ARE mentioned in the Torah, and I'm not remembering
it?)

Akiva Miller
____________________________________________________________
Man, 63, Avoids Wrinkles
63 Yr Old Man Shares Simple DIY Skin Tightening Method He Uses At Home
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/54db3a8c7fdf23a8c54c3st02vuc

I didn't want to chime in because all I had is an "I heard once"...

I heard once that the difference is that the menorah is indoors.

But that doesn't work, because there are 15 steps between the
azaros.

And for all of the kevesh possibly being part of the mizbeiach (and
it seems that way from p' Terumah) the whole mizbeiach didn't have the
qedushah of the Heichal. So even steps that were a 2nd-level keli for
the menorah were a contradiction to higher qedushah than the kevesh.
It would have to be a din in being a keli shareis itself, the fact that
it's the kevesh qua part of the mizebeiach that "sees", and not qedushah
in general.

I took it in an entirely different direction, but this is a vertl, not a
halachic discourse <http://www.aishdas.org/asp/why-the-altar>. And it's
a line of reasoning that is true for the mizbeiach more than the menorah:

    Aside from the obligation of how to build the altar itself, three
    other laws are relayed in this description of the mizbeiach:

    1- Do not make with Me gods of gold and gods of silver
    2- ... [D]o not make them hewn, for you have lifted your sword
       against it and profaned it.
    3- And do not go up upon steps on my altar, so that should shall
       not reveal your nakedness...

    Notice that these are references to the three sins that we are
    obligated "yeihareig ve'al ya'avor...

    ...
    One week someone sponsored bringing a famous Carlebach-style singer
    to serve as chazan in our shul for a Shabbos, as well as have
    kumzitz-style experiences at communal Shabbos meals, havdalah and
    melaveh malkah. The energy was high. We really felt moved.

    But one thing I noticed: between the songs and the dancing, people
    were talking during davening about how great it all was. The energy
    was so strong, it was hard to harness and guide correctly.

    What is a qorban? In Chassidic terms, it's "feerin tish" with the
    Aibishter -- sitting at the Almighty's "table", "breaking bread"
    with Him. It is the ultimate religious passionate experience. The
    word qorban itself refers to the emotional closeness it both expresses
    and generates.

    The pasuq mixes the introduction to sacrifices with the most
    fundamental laws of Judaism -- laws that speak to the very basics
    of our relationships with Hashem, other people, and mastery of
    ourselves. The Torah makes it clear that our spiritual experiences
    must come from halakhah, not despite it.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             A person lives with himself for seventy years,
mi...@aishdas.org        and after it is all over, he still does not
http://www.aishdas.org   know himself.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            - Rav Yisrael Salanter

In another thread, we mention the pasuk at the end of Yisro, that we must
not use a stairway to get up to the mizbe'ach, "so that your nakedness is
not revealed" on it.

Everywhere else, "giluy ervah - revealed nakedness" is a euphemism for
sexual relations. Using the idiom in this pasuk strikes me as odd. The
pasuk could have used other words to describe a need for tzni'us, that the
kohen's legs should not part more than necessary, but it seems to have gone
out of its way to suggest that we should not... hmmmm...

Let's put it this way. I'm going to use modern English idioms to illustrate
what I suspect is happening when the Torah uses this Hebrew idiom. We know
that there's a mitzvah of Morah Mikdash, to have the appropriate respect
while in the Mishkan, and not do frivolous activities. For example, if I'm
not mistaken, it is assur to sleep there. Now, suppose the Torah wanted to
explicitly forbid such sleeping, but instead of writing "Do not sleep on
the mizbe'ach", it had written "Do not sleep *with* the mizbe'ach." That's
sort of what seems to be happening in this pasuk.

Am I reading too much into this? Are there other cases where the Torah takes an idiom, and uses it so literally?

Akiva Miller
____________________________________________________________
Man, 63, Avoids Wrinkles
63 Yr Old Man Shares Simple DIY Skin Tightening Method He Uses At Home
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/54db3ffe2720d3ffe2e97st04vuc

On 02/11/2015 06:17 AM, Kenneth Miller via Avodah wrote:

  
> As I read and reread that pasuk and that Rashi, I find myself getting
> confused. Is the kevesh part of the mizbe'ach, or is it something
> separate? The pasuk says not to use steps to get to the mizbe'ach, so
> that the nakedness is not revealed "alav - on it". What is the "it"
> referring to? Is "it" the kevesh, or the mizbe'ach?

The kevesh is definitely part of the mizbeach, as evidenced by the fact
that its stones must not be touched by iron.
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/i/8101.htm#16

The stepping-stool for the menorah, OTOH, does not count as one of its
kelim, because all its kelim must be made of metal, but this was stone.
www.mechon-mamre.org/i/8101.htm#20
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/i/8103.htm#10


> What defines the kevesh as a kli shareis? I don't know. But when I
> looked in my notes, I saw nothing about steps up to the menorah. I
> did see that the menorah was 18 tefachim in height, and that (3 amos)
> is a typical human height. Is it possible that the reason why the
> menorah steps don't count as a kli shareis, is because it is not
> mentioned in the Torah? Could those steps be a mere convenience
> device provided for kohanim who were shorter than average, and that's
> why it is exempt from this hakpada? (Or maybe the steps to the
> menorah ARE mentioned in the Torah, and I'm not remembering it?)

It's not mentioned explicitly in the Torah, but Chazal inferred it from
the word "beha`alosecha" (see Rashi on the second pasuk of Beha`alosecha).
But I don't understand why you think it would only be needed by short
cohanim.  If the menorah was as tall as the average man then anyone
who wasn't unusually tall would need it in order to bring the lamps at
the top to a workable height.  Also, as the Rambam points out, it served
as a work surface while cleaning the lamps.






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



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


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


**************************************

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..."


A list of common acronyms is available at
        http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/acronyms.cgi
(They are also visible in the web archive copy of each digest.)