Avodah Mailing List

Volume 36: Number 4

Fri, 05 Jan 2018

• 1. Should One Go To Shul Today? (Professor L. Levine)
• 2. neural networks and halacha (Rich, Joel)
• 3. Nogea Badavar (Rich, Joel)
• 4. Re: Should One Go To Shul Today? (Joel Schnur)
• 5. Re: Nogea Badavar (Zev Sero)
• 6. Re: Merchavyah (Micha Berger)
• 7. Re: neural networks and halacha (Micha Berger)
• 8. Re: Historicity of Aggadta (Micha Berger)
• 9. Re: truth telling (Micha Berger)
• 10. Re: Historicity of Aggadta (Micha Berger)
• 11. Re: Historicity of Aggadta (H Lampel)
• 12. Re: neural networks and halacha (Micha Berger)
• 13. Re: HELP - Why is there an Issur BBCh on a Nefel/Shellil? (Micha Berger)

There is a major snow storm hitting the northeast today. NYC public schools
are closed today,  a rarity.  Stevens Institute announced yesterday that
the university will be closed today.  There are many other closures due to
the snow,  cold and high winds.


In light of this,  I ask from a Torah point of view "Should one go to shul
today?"  While things may not have been too bad in the early morning, they
are getting worse by the hour,	so should one go to shul for mincha.?  It
is getting really dangerous outside.


Davening with a minyan is as far as I know a d'rabbonim,  while guarding
one's health is a D'Oreisa. Does this mean that those who did go to shul
should not have gone?  I have no answers,  just questions.


NYC has asked that if at all possible people should stay off the road
today,	so I presume that all will agree that no one should not have driven
to shul this morning if one went.


For the record, I did not go to shul this morning.  Given my knee problems I have to be most careful about not falling.


YL
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20180104/6a064f93/attachment-0001.html>

Will neural networks and deep learning be used to develop an A.I. halachic
intuition? If you think not, why not? What about if neural networks that
learn to explain themselves? Should they be used as an adjunct by poskim?
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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20180104/3a262b58/attachment-0001.html>

I recently heard a Rav say that one who is considering retirement should
not ask their local Rav about retiring if they are a major contributor to
that Rav's institutions, due to the concept of nogea badavar (interested
party). I couldn't help but wonder where one draws the line (i.e., why
isn't it always a case of nogea bdvar in the paid rabbinate model?)
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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20180104/ba46d506/attachment-0001.html>

I think u made a wise decision. Now someone much younger and in better shape than us would likely choose otherwise LOL!

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jan 4, 2018, at 8:42 AM, Professor L. Levine <llev...@stevens.edu> wrote:
> 
> There is a major snow storm hitting the northeast today. NYC public
> schools are closed today,	a rarity.  Stevens Institute announced
> yesterday that the university will be closed today.  There are many
> other closures due to the snow,  cold and high winds.
> 
> 
> In light of this,	I ask from a Torah point of view "Should one go to
> shul today?"  While things may not have been too bad in the early
> morning, they are getting worse by the hour,  so should one go to shul
> for mincha.?  It is getting really dangerous outside.
> 
> 
> Davening with a minyan is as far as I know a d'rabbonim,  while
> guarding one's health is a D'Oreisa. Does this mean that those who did
> go to shul should not have gone?  I have no answers,  just questions.
> 
> NYC has asked that if at all possible people should stay off the road
> today,  so I presume that all will agree that no one should not have
> driven to shul this morning if one went.
> 
> 
> For the record, I did not go to shul this morning.  Given my knee problems I have to be most careful about not falling.
> 
> 
> YL
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20180104/6ebc6b4f/attachment-0001.html>

On 04/01/18 00:20, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote:
> I recently heard a Rav say that one who is considering retirement should 
> not ask their local Rav about retiring if they are a major contributor 
> to that Rav?s institutions, due to the concept of nogea badavar 
> (interested party). I couldn?t help but wonder where one draws the line 
> (i.e., why isn?t it always a case of nogea bdvar in the paid rabbinate 
> model?)

Since you raised the topic, I've long wondered why the entire body of 
psak about rabbinic tenure should not be thrown out as one giant mess of 
self-pleading.  How can any paid rabbi (or anyone with hopes of becoming 
one) possibly pasken on the subject?


-- 
Zev Sero            A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all
z...@sero.name       Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper

On Wed, Jan 03, 2018 at 06:26:41PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote:
: A "doubt" is what happens when you've done your best to figure out the
: situation, and you can't decide which way to go. So, for example, a
: person who came across several authoritative texts, some of which
: spelled "merchavyah" as one word and some spelled it as two, IF he was
: unaware of this Gemara, then he would count up his texts and follow
: the rov.

If the gemara is no good to resolve a safeiq, it's no good to avoid
it to begin with.

I was suggesting that a kosher seifer Torah is defined by rov girsa'os,
regardless of other sources and testimonies.

This is in parallel to my belief that knowing what Chazal's zeisim were
like through evidence found by archeologists in places like Masada
doesn't eliminate needing to deal with pesaqim that were nispashtos
based on much larger shiurim.

Halakhah can and does drift, and is supposed to. Like my overused example
of the differences in the mizbeiach between bayis rishon and bayis
sheini. Anshei Keneses haGedolah knew that what they were requiring
for nisuch was impossible in bayis rishon, and by their pesaq no one
from Shelomo to the first churban -- and possibly even the Mishkan! --
was yotzei nisuch. Meanwhile (I argued, but others disagreed), by the
pesaqim of bayis rishon, bayis sheini's mizbeiach with holes in it
was the problematic one, and nisuch down that hole was not necessarily
kosher. "Problematic" and "not necessarily" because I have no reason
to believe it was outright discussed. But still, AKhG presumed kulos no
one relied on until them as well.

So, knowing what a kosher Tehillim was in Chazal's day may not mean
that's what is kosher today. But...

How is this a halachic question again? How is a copy of Tehillim kosher
or pasul? The kavanah and pronunciation are unchanged, no? It's important
to know what the pasuq actually says, but is it a halachic question
at all?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Weeds are flowers too
mi...@aishdas.org        once you get to know them.
http://www.aishdas.org          - Eeyore ("Winnie-the-Pooh" by AA Milne)
Fax: (270) 514-1507

On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 05:18:55AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote:
: Will neural networks and deep learning be used to develop an
: A.I. halachic intuition? If you think not, why not? What about if neural
: networks that learn to explain themselves? Should they be used as an
: adjunct by poskim?

I don't think so, because halakhah is hard to convert into the kind
of inputs amenable to neural nets. But I've been surprised before,
and besides... tech forecasting is kind of off-topic for this vanue.

However, you couldn't have an AI poseiq for the same reasons we've been
debating about women as posqos -- there is more to something qualifying
as hora'ah than the quality of the sevara.

As a tool for suggesting sevaros for a rav to consider? Could they? Should
they? Depends how good they end up being. I don't see this as a Torah
question as much as a pragmatic one. Should a poseiq utilize YU's or
JTS's library? A search engine? Same thing, no?


Forecast for the next Sanhedrin: They will allow use of AI on dinei
nefashos only if the AI includes a filter such that only sevaros lehaqeil
are let through. Much the way a dayan can only change their mind and
deliberate to convincing others of a new position (they can change their
mind for the vote) when going from chatav to patur.

Malkos too, they seem to be subsumed under DN in this context. For example
the AhS that this rule would not apply to dinei mamunus because what is
lehaqeil for one party is lehachmir for another. Never mentions malkos, but
that sevara would place malkos with DN.

(Can you guess where I'm up to in AhS yomi?)

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Rescue me from the desire to win every
mi...@aishdas.org        argument and to always be right.
http://www.aishdas.org              - Rav Nassan of Breslav
Fax: (270) 514-1507                   Likutei Tefilos 94:964

On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 12:20:19AM -0500, H Lampel via Avodah wrote:
: RSM and RMB share this belief, but it has no basis in the Rambam's
: words or context. (And the reasoning is circular. The reason RSM
: believes Rambam would say the veracity of a reported is unimportant
: is because Chazal are not interested...)

1- The Rambam says that history is unimportant.
2- and that they only discuss important things. Even if my "only the
   tachlis" was based on Ibn Tibon's inaccurate translation, that's
   not the only place he says so.
3- And that chakhamim (lower case c, including upper-case-c Chakhmeinu
   za"l) only discuss these things in metaphor, as we see from Mishlei.

Like the next line, "Ve'eikh na'asimam al shemechaberim chokhmah al
derekh mashal" -- like Shelomo did. To the Rambam, speaking in mashal
umelitzah and chidah are the hallmarks of how Chakhamim communicate.
That section closes by saying this rule applies to the Rambam's own
work, "ve'az tistakeil besifri zeh veyo'il lakh, be"hA".

It's not that deep truths are an exception from normal communication
and only they are done in mashal.

It's that eis la'asos Lashem, in order not to lose halakhah we need to
write it down in plaintext!

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

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

On Wed, Jan 03, 2018 at 05:57:20AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote:
: Agree but it can also mislead. So if ur child comes home and asks about
: the proof based on the Torah listing all the 4 animals that have only one
: kosher sign and u say nothing.....or his rabbi told him dinosaurs didn't
: exist. U can craft answers but istm as a society many subgroups don't.

Most subgroups who think there are only 4 animals with one such sign
and/or that dinosaurs don't exist aren't doing so to use a lie to
reenforce emunah. They believe what they're teaching.

So I don't think this example has much to do with the original question.

This is more about not contradicting a teacher, so as to enable the
child to trust what they learn of things other than emunah from them.
By postponing teaching emunah. (Most of which they won't get anyway;
real emunah requires more intellectual maturity. You typically teach
a child to deeply believe in a Old Man in the Sky or some more subtle
form of apiqursus if you try too hard to produce a young maamin.)


As I see it, the key questions are:

1- Is it even possible to gain more people through a lie than will be
risked because lies are eventually seen through? Does the question make
sense pragmatically?

And

2- Since most of us define emunah as being justified belief, rather than
blind faith, does belief that is founded on a lie even qualify as emunah?

I already suggested that I think it wouldn't fit the Rambam's definition,
but that few of us would consider that the halakhah lemaaseh criterion.
As I understand the Rambam's need for knowledge based on sound
philosphical proof -- to the explicit exclusion of justification by
personal experience or reliable sources, belief based on an error (even
someone else's error, like if there are more than 4 minim of animals
that have 1 siman) would also not be emunah.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

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

On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 01:56:51PM -0500, H Lampel wrote:
: >On 1/2/2018 4:40 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
: >>... The story of the Chanukah oil
: >>might not be an aggadic story, as the chiyuv of pirsumei nisa is impossible
: >>without knowing the neis. This is the same reason the Rambam records the
: >>story in the Yad, no?

: If Chazal were not interested in the historical veracity of events
: they reported, then one could easily argue that the story about the
: pach shemen is metaphor; and the kindling of lights is to symbolize,
: celebrate and publicize the miraculous victory of the Maccabees that
: brought about "the freedom to worship...concealed in darkness ...
: now brought to light" (Josephus)...

Except that this isn't an aggadic story, since your interpretation would
rob the menorah of pirsumei nisah.

But in general, yes, the Rambam repeating a story as historical as his
opinion, and he would not insist that there is any obligation to take it
as so.

...
: Thus my counterpoints from Rambam's writings where he does express
: such concern and/or spontaneously and innocently repeats Midrashim
: as historic fact.

Again, you are arguing like I said the Rambam holds that no story
is historical. And instead I am saying the Rambam holds that no
story is told for its historical content, and the history isn't the
point. Some are historical, some are stories, and that's a side issue.

But if the Rambam feels that it's likely a given story was historical,
why wouldn't he use it that way?

: And as for deducing from Rambam's alleged remark (that "all the
: words of Chazal are expressing inyanim elokiyim/elyonim") that the
: Rambam held that their intent was /only/ in those matters, would you
: conclude the same from this passage from the 8th Y'sod HaDaas?

This point was conceded two posts ago, after RSM translated from the
Arabic. But since the Rambam says repeatedly that they're only discussing
lofty matters, eliminating one such occurance doesn't mean much
The Rambam's whole discussion of Shelomo and how he wrote ShS, Mishei
and Qoheles and citation of other examples is all about how Chakhamim
communicate in metaphor. The thesis doesn't work if you think that
they only sometimes communicate that way. (I believe that's RSM's
point.)

: "Kol dibbur v'dibbur min HaTorah yeish bahen chochmos upela-im l'mi
: she-mayvin osom v'lo hu-saga tachliss chochmasam..."

: "All the statements in the Torah contains chochmos upela-im for one
: who? understands them, and [yet] their ultimate wisdom is
: unfathomable."

: Shall one conclude from this that the Rambam holds that the Torah's
: only intent was for these wondrous concepts, and that it is not
: concerned with the historic veracity of the lives of the Avos, of
: Yetsias Mitzrayim and Mattan Torah?

This is totally irrelevent. Nothing to do with medrash, nor with metaphor,
but with the limitations of human comprehension. So, understand what you
can.

: I posted separately about the translation of Rambam's Arabic, and
: how correctly translated it does not indicate that,

You know Judeo-Arabic? The PDF you sent us links to is opaque to
me. To you too, no? So it's just one more official translation, no more
authoritative than the one I was using by R' Yosef el-Qafeh (a/k/a Kapach)
<http://www.daat.ac.il/daat/mahshevt/rambam/hakdamat-2.htm#3>. I dragged
RSM into this for the sole purpose of having someone tell me what the
original is, so that we have more data about which translation he thought
was more literal. And lemaaseh, he agreed with where the word translated
"kulam" belongs.

But the problem is that you're making a discussion of an idea into a
debate of that one line. As RSM pointed out and I wrote above, the whole
discussion depends on it, regardless of my overreliance on the Hebrew
version you were using leading to error.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             You are where your thoughts are.
mi...@aishdas.org                - Ramban, Igeres haQodesh, Ch. 5
http://www.aishdas.org
Fax: (270) 514-1507

> On 1/2/2018 4:40 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
>> ... The story of the Chanukah oil
>> might not be an aggadic story, as the chiyuv of pirsumei nisa is impossible
>> without knowing the neis. This is the same reason the Rambam records the
>> story in the Yad, no?
If Chazal were not interested in the historical veracity of events they 
reported, then one could easily argue that the story about the pach 
shemen is metaphor; and the kindling of lights is to symbolize, 
celebrate and publicize the miraculous victory of the Maccabees that 
brought about ''the freedom to worship...concealed in darkness ... now 
brought to light'' (Josephus). (Of course, even this is saying that when 
Chazal reported a military victory of the few against the many, etc.., 
they meant it historically, which according to you is not their concern. 
Could be the whole thing is metaphor for Chazal's belief that good 
triumphs over evil.)
>> ... You
>> are arguing as though I said that the Rambam concidered EVERY aggadic
>> story ahistorical.
>>
>> What I said was, according to the Rambam none of them were repeated for
>> the sake of history. Which then leaves the matter of historicity open
>> to personal opinion.
I agree Chazal did not report history solely for the sake of history, 
sans a lesson from it.

That doesn't mean the lesson was their exclusive concern, and they were 
unconcerned about the historic veracity of the event they connected the 
lesson to.

But your your rendition of the proof text you brought indicated just 
that, and not that . You claimed it proved that all of Chazal's 
statements (and not just the implausible ones) are intended solely for 
sublime concepts. Which means Rambam's stand on the matter of 
historicity is not open to personal opinion, but that Chazal and he were 
definitely unconcerned about it.

Thus my counterpoints from Rambam's writings where he does express such 
concern and/or spontaneously and innocently repeats Midrashim as 
historic fact.

And as for deducing from Rambam's alleged remark (that ''all the words 
of Chazal are expressing inyanim elokiyim/elyonim'') that the Rambam 
held that their intent was /only/ in those matters, would you conclude 
the same from this passage from the 8th Y'sod HaDaas?

''Kol dibbur v'dibbur min HaTorah yeish bahen chochmos upela-im l'mi 
she-mayvin osom v'lo hu-saga tachliss chochmasam...''

''All the statements in the Torah contains chochmos upela-im for one 
who? understands them, and [yet] their ultimate wisdom is unfathomable.''

Shall one conclude from this that the Rambam holds that the Torah's only 
intent was for these wondrous concepts, and that it is not concerned 
with the historic veracity of the lives of the Avos, of Yetsias 
Mitzrayim and Mattan Torah?
>> ...
>> : And I refer you again to my point(posted Tue, 26 Dec 201, Message 10)
>> : about the Rambam's felt need to identify which aggadic reports were
>> : really reports of dreams and which were not...
>>
>> He felt a need to reassure the rationalist that his mesorah isn't teaching
>> things that were disproven philosophically.
I think you missed my point. That reassurance is already accomplished by 
the alleged position that in /all/ their comments, plausible as well as 
implausible, the intent is exclusively in the (sublime) message, and the 
veracity of the event is irrelevant.

But, if he held that veracity of events reported was of concern, and 
that only implausible reports contain inyanim elokyim, there is reason 
for the Rambam to go out of his way to categorize some reports as 
reports of dreams.

I posted separately about the translation of Rambam's Arabic, and how 
correctly translated it does not indicate that,
>> ... mashal is the way of communicating deep stuff -- but it's
>> ALL deep stuff.
>>
http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol36/v36n001.shtml#14 (see paragraph 
beginning, ''--Two types of statements'')

Zvi Lampel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20180104/1499fef9/attachment-0001.html>

Another thought:

I didn't think AI could do the job at all. But say I'm wrong, and (like
reading images in radiology and some other tasks) AIs can pick up things
better than a poseiq:

Many (most?) rishonim and acharonim have taken eilu va'eilu literally,
that both answers are right, and that (unlike the Maharal) this is a rule,
and not something specific to Beis Hillel and Beis Shammai.

A poseiq of this inclination would believe that there are multiple
right answers. An AI finding one sevara wouldn't mean to him that the
sevara he came up with was wrong. He would weigh each sevara on their
own merits, and any trust in the AI's ability to find a good sevara
shouldn't translate into a fear of concluding otherwise.

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             If a person does not recognize one's own worth,
mi...@aishdas.org        how can he appreciate the worth of another?
http://www.aishdas.org             - Rabbi Yaakov Yosef of Polnoye,
Fax: (270) 514-1507                  author of Toldos Yaakov Yosef

On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 12:31:32PM +1100, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi via Avodah wrote:
: I have yet to find anyone asking this Q -
: the Nefel and Shelil seem to be the same thing
: it is a Neneilah
: yet it is Assur to eat as BBCh - why is there no Ein Issur Chal Al Issur?

Is it because BbCh is a issur kolel, since it includes not only issur
akhilah, but also a general issur hana'ah?

:-)BBii!
-Micha


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



_______________________________________________
Avodah mailing list
Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
http://www.aishdas.org/lists/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://www.aishdas.org/lists/avodah/avodahareivim-membership-agreement/


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/lists/avodah/avodah-acronyms
(They are also visible in the web archive copy of each digest.)