Avodah Mailing List

Volume 37: Number 46

Wed, 05 Jun 2019

• 1. Re: How many bones in the human body? (Abraham J. Friedman)
• 2. Re: How many bones in the human body? (Akiva Miller)
• 3. Re: How many bones in the human body? (Marty Bluke)
• 4. Re: Avi Fishoff: Yeshiva Systems Needs Major Overhaul (Micha Berger)
• 5. Re: Avi Fishoff: Yeshiva Systems Needs Major Overhaul (Prof. Levine)
• 6. Re: Kriat Hatorah (Akiva Miller)
• 7. Re: Kriat Hatorah (Micha Berger)
• 8. Re: Kriat Hatorah (Rich, Joel)
• 9. Re: Kriat Hatorah (Micha Berger)
• 10. Why Do So Many Boys and Girls Go to Learn in Eretz Yisroel (Lawrence Levine)

I would imagine that just like by a strawberry whereby it is classified as
a fruit scientifically but nevertheless halacha requires us to make a
hadaamah on it, similarly with the skeletal structural composition of a
human. There must be a difference for the basis of classification as to
what makes something count as a bone. Did they actually count it out or
simply come to the conclusion based on a drasha?






[image: Google Plus]
<https://plus.google.com/u/0/105340884154171026929/about>

*Sincerely, *

Abraham J. Friedman

ajfrie...@gmail.com

Connect with me on Linkedin
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/abraham-j-friedman-796159149>




On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 9:22 PM Marty Bluke via Avodah <
avo...@lists.aishdas.org> wrote:

> The Gemara in  bechoros 45 says that the human body has 248 bones and that
> women have 4 additional bones, 252 in total. The modern consensus is that
> an adult has 206 bones the same number for men and women.
>
> What explanations are given to resolve these discrepancies besides
> nishtane hateva?
> _______________________________________________
> Avodah mailing list
> Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
> http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20190604/27fab510/attachment-0001.html>

.

R' Marty Bluke asked:

> The Gemara in  bechoros 45 says that the human body has 248
> bones and that women have 4 additional bones, 252 in total.
> The modern consensus is that an adult has 206 bones the same
> number for men and women.
>
> What explanations are given to resolve these discrepancies
> besides nishtane hateva?

To me, the simplest answer lies in the definition of "a bone".

For example, there might be something that the modern consensus counts as
mere cartilage or something else, while the Gemara counts it as a bone. And
there might be things that the modern consensus counts as one single bone,
while the Gemara counts it as two or more.

By the way, a careful reading of R' Bluke's first sentence will suggest
that according to the Gemara, women are not human. For more on this topic,
I highly recommend Sarah Rudolph's recent article, "Words Matter", at
https://www.ou.org/life/inspiration/words-matter/

Akiva Miller
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20190605/0be2307d/attachment-0001.html>

On Wednesday, June 5, 2019, Abraham J. Friedman <ajfrie...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I would imagine that just like by a strawberry whereby it is classified as
> a fruit scientifically but nevertheless halacha requires us to make a
> hadaamah on it, similarly with the skeletal structural composition of a
> human. There must be a difference for the basis of classification as to
> what makes something count as a bone. Did they actually count it out or
> simply come to the conclusion based on a drasha?

The Gemara there has a story that they counted the bones of an executed
person and ended up with 152. They asked R' Yishmael about the extra bones
and he asked was it a woman and they said yes. We see from this story that
they actually counted the number of bones.

On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 04:49:27PM +0000, Lawrence Levine via Avodah wrote:
: From https://is.gd/znrz8P
:> Having successfully created that infrastructure, Fishoff said that
:> the time has come to prioritize maximizing the potential of each child
:> instead of encouraging every student to become a long term learner,
:> a goal that leaves many feeling like failures.

This is akin to discussion we had in the early days of this list --
did REED et al mean "1000 go in so that 1 gadol comes out" as a hora'as
sha'ah? At the time this model was promoted, we did need to rebuild
the infrastucture.

And yes, dyslexic and AD[H]D labeled children might well make up the
majority of the OTD boys' population. If not, it's a very disproportionate
minority.

But I think there is something else going on that may be more primary
than the urge to produce gedolim. R Ari Fishoff talks about "child",
but focusing on the goals of producing a "long term learner" means he's
talking about boys' education.

On the girls' side too, though, we had a system that used to teach
a Yahadus of "Chessed and the other 612". (Exagerating for slogan
purposes. Chessed is an umbrella that includes a number of the 613,
not just 1.) But now there is progressively more focus on tzeni'us.

What the two have in common is a turning inward. A transplant of Torah
through the "Me Generation" period.

Insert my usual rant about frumkeit having replaced ehrlachkeit here.

One of my OTD sons picked up my sefer long enough to form an opinion
of its thesis. He is pretty sure that had Yahadus actually maintained
the Bein Adam laChaveiro focus R Shimon Shkop (or R' Chaim Volozhiner or
R Chaim Brisker, or...) had taken for granted, he doesn't know if he
wouldn't have opted out.

In short, the O he doesn't believe in, I don't believe in either. And
it's quite likely my boys picked that much of the message up from me.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger                 Today is the 46th day, which is
http://www.aishdas.org/asp   6 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer.
Author: Widen Your Tent      Netzach sheb'Malchus: How can some forms of
- https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF                       "unity" be over domineering?

At 12:19 PM 6/5/2019, Micha Berger wrote:
>This is akin to discussion we had in the early days of this list --
>did REED et al mean "1000 go in so that 1 gadol comes out" as a hora'as
>sha'ah? At the time this model was promoted, we did need to rebuild
>the infrastucture.

IMO everyone should read Rabbi Dr. Joseph Breur's essay Vocation and 
Calling. I can send it to anyone who is interested.

Here are some selections from this essay.

The choice of a vocation for our mature youth (we are initially
concerned with our male youth) is unquestionably one of the serious 
challenges that confronts parents. Aware of their responsibility, 
parents realize that the success and happiness of their children are 
vitally dependent on the right choice of a profession, which, 
obviously, should be compatible with their children's inclinations 
and talents. Fortunate the parents who succeed early enough in 
analyzing their children's talents and traits, and are thus able to 
offer helpful guidance in their choice of vocation. Alas, the wrongly 
chosen profession often results in acute dissatisfaction or, 
worse,utter emptiness.

<Snip>

This, incidentally, brings to mind the oft-repeated question
whether it should not be welcomed if bachurim express the desire
to "remain in learning." "Remain"? Should not everyone "remain
in learning"? Evidently what is meant is the exclusive occupation 
with Torah study. If this involves the student's full-time occupation 
with "learning" for a period of several years before embarking upon a 
professional career, such a decision should only be welcomed. We 
would have serious misgivings, however, if the decision of exclusive 
"learning" would exclude any thought of a practical preparation for 
the demands of life. Every profession requires training. This may not 
be possible at a more advanced age. (The chance of entering the firm 
of one's future father-in-law where further training is possible is 
not normally given to the average student.) On the other hand, few 
possess the ability to become a Rosh Yeshiva. To be able to "learn" 
does not at all mean that one is able to teach.
In this connotation, the following word of wisdom comes to mind, 
albeit in a loftier, more far-reaching interpretation: "Thou- sands 
occupy themselves with the Written Teaching, but mere hundreds emerge 
who actually possess it; tens occupy themselves with the Talmud, but 
only one actually masters it - and thus muses Koheles: 'One man I 
found among thousands'" (Midrash Rabbah Koheles 7).
In every case, the responsible officials of our Torah institutions 
should carefully determine, after a given period of time, whether the 
individual student possesses the qualifications to justify the choice 
of Torah study as an occupation, or whether it would not be
necessary to suggest to him to concern himself with his professional 
training (while, of course, continuing to be koveah itim l'Torah). ln 
many of the latter cases the school officials would do well not to 
rely on the self-judgment of the individual student.
Is it conceivable that the high praise that Tehillim (128) reserves 
for the head of the family who labors and cares for his wife and 
children would be directed only to the "less gifted" among our people?

<Snip>

We need the greats of Torah. But we also need men, solid bnei Torah, 
who prove themselves as conscientious Yehudim in every type of 
profession, thus striving towards the lofty goal envisioned by the 
faithful of our people: to serve with their lives, before all the
world, the sanctification of the Divine Will - Kiddush Hashem.

YL






-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20190605/1cb8ac55/attachment-0001.html>

.
R' Joel Rich asked:

> R?YBS held that the order of kohein, Levi, Yisrael for aliyot is
> a requirement in the kriat hatorah (not in kavod) and thus, if not
> observed, there would not be a kiyum kriat hatorah bshlaimuta
> (complete completion of the mitzvah of kriat hatorah (see Halakkic
> Positions of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik ? Page 101). This would
> preclude what seems to be the somewhat common approach of asking
> the Cohain to leave so that his aliyah can be given to a Yisrael.

Even in a situation where the kriat hatorah is essentially d'Oraisa, the
structure and organization of the aliyot is d'rabanan at most. In other
words, I cannot imagine that R?YBS held that the order of kohein, Levi,
Yisrael for aliyot is a *Torah* requirement in the kriat hatorah.

But honoring the Cohain *IS* a Torah requirement. If there is a situation
where we are justified in asking the Cohain to step outside, I can't
imagine worrying about the "bshlaimuta" as described here.

Akiva Miller
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20190605/2becd9a2/attachment-0001.html>

On Tue, Jun 04, 2019 at 09:10:31PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote:
: R'YBS held that the order of kohein, Levi, Yisrael for aliyot is a
: requirement in the kriat hatorah (not in kavod) and thus, if not observed,
: there would not be a kiyum [kriat] hatorah bshlaimuta...

Lo zakhisi lehavin (and I don't own a Halakkic Positions of Rabbi Joseph
B. Soloveitchik pg 101).

We have seen the inyan of calling a kohein up first when discussing how
"darkei Shalom" can't refer to a survival strategy. If we call a kohein
first "mishum darkei Shalom", then why are we assuming any of the invocations
of the idea WRT nakhriim is any different? (Never mind the Rambam proving
"darkei Shalom" with "derkheha darkhei no'am vekhol nesivoseha shalom".)

But back to our point, Gittin 5:8 says the reason for calling a kohein first
is "darkei Shalom". Isn't that about not offending the person who would
think they deserve the first aliyah if the criterion was more objective?
(And when only the first and last person made berakhos, this didn't just
shift the competition among Yisraelim to shelishi.)

It is true that the gemara's proof-text (59b) is Devarim 31:9, MRAH
giving the kohanim their manuscript of the Torah first. Or other such
pesuqim which list teaching the kohanim first. One exception, R
Chiyya b Abba holds it is from Vayiqra 21:8, "veqidashto" -- making
it a din in qedushas kohanim, unrelated to lating.

But then Abayei continues by asking whether all this means that darkei
Shalom is deOraisa? And R Yosef says it is true that a kohein reads
first deOraisa, and yet it's because of DS.

None of which would make it a din in qeri'ah.

What's RYBS's maqor?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger                 Today is the 46th day, which is
http://www.aishdas.org/asp   6 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer.
Author: Widen Your Tent      Netzach sheb'Malchus: How can some forms of
- https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF                       "unity" be over domineering?

> On Tue, Jun 04, 2019 at 09:10:31PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote:
> : R'YBS held that the order of kohein, Levi, Yisrael for aliyot is a
> : requirement in the kriat hatorah (not in kavod) and thus, if not observed,
> : there would not be a kiyum [kriat] hatorah bshlaimuta...
> 
> Lo zakhisi lehavin (and I don't own a Halakkic Positions of Rabbi Joseph
> B. Soloveitchik pg 101).

',,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
?The Gemara Megillah 23b asks  ?to what do the three aliyos correspond? Rav
Assi answers: To Torah,Nviim, and Ksuvim.  This means that the Torah
incorporates within itself all three kedushos: Kedushas Torah,Kedushas
Neviim , and Kedushas Ksuvim.  Rovo answers that the 3 aliyos correspond to
Kohen, Levi and Yisrael. 

We see from the above that the reason for calling a kohen first to the
Torah is not only because of vkidashto, as the Gemara gittin suggests, but
also because it is an integral part of the mitzvah of Krias hatorah.  
Therefore according to Rav Soloveitchik if there is no kohen for the first
aliyah for any reason, the completeness of kiyum krias hatorah bshlaimus is
lacking.?

Kt
Joel 

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.

On Wed, Jun 05, 2019 at 07:08:31PM +0000, Rich, Joel wrote:
: We see from the above that the reason for calling a kohen first to the
: Torah is not only because of vkidashto, as the Gemara gittin suggests,
: but also because it is an integral part of the mitzvah of Krias hatorah.
...

Then R Yosef couldn't respond to Abayei that the pesuqim prove that
darkhei Shalom is deOraisa. They could well speak of this "integral part
of the mitzvah of Krias hatorah."

I mean, the majority of pesuqim in Gittin even would seem to be about
qeri'as haTorah, until R Yosef says that they're about DS, just in QhT
and talmud Torah situations.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger                 Today is the 46th day, which is
http://www.aishdas.org/asp   6 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer.
Author: Widen Your Tent      Netzach sheb'Malchus: How can some forms of
- https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF                       "unity" be over domineering?

Ever wonder why it has become so popular for boys and girls to go to Eretz
Yisroel to study Torah. Rabbi Brudny discusses this in the talk below
starting at about half way through his remarks.  YL


LINK TO RABBI BRUDNY BEAUTIFUL SHAVUOS VAAD:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/a8gj253fs4gww05/026%20Rav%20Brudny%20Vaad%20Shavuos%205779.MP3?dl=0

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20190605/33f947a6/attachment.html>

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



_______________________________________________
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.)