Avodah Mailing List

Volume 03 : Number 040

Saturday, May 1 1999

• OBM, OH, ZTL, ZL, etc.
• Re; Yissachar-Zevulun
• Calendar issues
• Re: Gedolim, Synthesis
• Re: Kollel & Yissachar Zevulun
• Re: OBM, OH, ZTL, ZL, etc.
• Re: Gedolim, Synthesis
• Objectivity and the Talmid Hakham
• Comments about "Gedolim"
• Re: My Gadol is bigger than your Gadol
• Re: My Gadol is bigger than your Gadol
• R. Scwab as Nogeia
• Re: My Gadol is bigger than your Gadol
• Administrivia
• Re: My Gadol is bigger than your Gadol
• RE: Defining Gedolim
• Avodah/Aishdas and Gedolim
• Calendar

>>For example, was Rav J.B. Soloveitchik zt"l (z"l
according to the Jewish Observer obituary) <<

do any sources discuss the crieteria that gives 
Moshe Rabeinu an OH
Elioyaho Hanovi a Zachur Latov
others a ZTL (which is half a possuk in Mishlei) etc.

Or IOW why don't we say Moshe Rabbeinu ZTL, etc.?

Rich Wolpoe

From the language of the Mechaber (and the TUR) YD Siman 246:1, it looks
like one Zevulun can support many talmidei chachamim (the language is in
the plural: "yaspik L'ACHEYRIM").

Josh

I am more than a little confused over various remarks made in the last
few days that imply that solution of the so-called "calendar problem"
(the drift of Pessach into the summer)  can await the coming of the
Moshiach since the problem today is merely theoretical. In fact, this
was the approach used by R. Avraham bar Hiyya in his "Sefer Haibbur"
(written in 1123) but is no longer a valid approach. As has been pointed
out, the fact that the Torah refers to Pessach as occuring in
"Chodesh HaAviv" (the spring month) seems to imply that Pessach should
begin within 30 days following the vernal equinox. In fact, in 1303
Pessach began on April 22 (I am using the Gregorian date, although the
Gregorian calendar did not yet exist),  in 1436 it began on April 24, in
1815 Pessach began on April 25 and in 2215 Pessach w6ll begin on April
25! (I have only stated the years when the latest date of Pessach
advanced by another day. On average, every 216 years the date of Pesach
of another year of the 19 year cycle moves past April 20.) Suggestions
have been made to modify the calendar rules to avoid this problem (As
stated, it stems from a 6.5 minute inaccuracy of the length of the solar
year used in calendrical calculations.)  Two other points should be
made:

[1] Perhaps the Torah does not require that Pessach occur within 30 days
of the vernal equinox. Of course, if left unresolved eventually Pessach
will drift into the summer (and then fall and winter), but this will
take a long time. Until then, we may ignore the alleged problem of
Pessach beginning after April 20. In fact, since, to the best of my
knowledge the major codifiers do NOT quote a requirement that pessach
begin within a  30 day window following the vernal equinox, this
explanation seems reasonable.

[2] In 1538 when 25 sages gathered in Z'fat and re-established the
"Smicha", R. Levi ibn Haviv of Yerushalayim, who opposed the move,
justified his opposition by the argument, amoung others, that if the
Sanhedrin was re-established (to renew Smicha) it would perforce have to
deal with the Sanctification of the New Moon and there are too many
halachik uncertainties to do this today (i.e. in the 16th century).


Regarding the Sa'adia-Ben-Meir argument concerning the date of Rosh
Hashana, it has already been stated that Ben Meir wished to add 642
chalakim to the calendrical rule of "molad zakein". The origin of these
642 chalakim has been brought up. The scholar Z.H. Yaffe has argued as
follows. Calendrical calculations require two constants; the average
length of the lunar month and the value of a reference molad. Given
these two, conbined with the 4 "dchiyot" one can easily calculate the
full Hebrew calendar for any year. The reference molad used today is
called Molad ToHu (the molad of Tishrei for year 0) and equals the value
"BaHaRad" i.e. 2 days, 5 hours and 204 chalakim (This value can be found
in ANY book on Jewish calendrical astronomy e.g. Rambam, etc.) . Where
does this value come from ?  In fact, if we use the values in Ptolemy's
"Almagest" we find the the "true" value of Molad Nissan of year 1 (1/2
year after Molad Tohu)  for Yerushalayim is 4 days, 9 hours and 188
chalakim. Similarly, the Molad of Tishrei afterwards (i.e. of year 1) is
6 days, 13 hours and 526 chalakim. Neither value is a round number and
is hard to remember. According to Yaffe, the sages of Bavel used the
value of Tishrei  as fundamental; they rounded the value of Molad
Tishrei of year 1 to 6 days and 14 hours and then re-calculated Molad
Tohu, which comes out as 2 days, 5 hours and 204 chalakim (i.e.
BaHaRad). On the other hand, the Sages of Eretz Yisrael considered the
value of Molad Nissan to be fundamental; they rounded the value of Molad
Nissan of year 1 to 4 days and 9 hours and calculated (backwards) a new
value for Molad Tohu. Note, that the sages of Bavel added 454 chalakim
to the "true" value of Molad ToHu in their round-off procedure, while
the sages of Israel subtracted 188 chalakim in their roundoff. Thus, the
difference in Molad Tohu between the two calculations is 454 +188 =
642 chalakim. Yaffe speculates that the difference in the two reference
points originated some 80 years before the Sa'adia-Ben Meir controversy;
however, until year 923 the issue was merely theoretical; it didn't make
a practical difference. However, in 923 (4684) there was a diffrence in
the date of Rosh Hashana obtained by using the two difference values for
Molad Tohu so Ben Meir insisted that 642 chalakim be added to "dchiyat
Molad Zakein" to correct for the "error" in Molad Tohu.

(All of the above information, and A LOT more can be found in the
incredible book "She'arim La'Luach Ha'Ivry" by R. Sar-Shalom,  77 Ben
Ami. Natanya, Israel. I highly recommend the book, if you can get a
copy.)

Saul Stokar

--- richard_wolpoe@ibi.com wrote:
> One aspect in particular that is fascinating is the synthizing of 2
> separate and
> distinct derochim.  I detect a pattern common to those Torah giants
> who have 
> split their education amongst at least 2 schools. 
<snip>
> And perhaps this explains why yeshiva x does not always have a
> groomed and ready
> Rosh Yeshiva heir apparent coming out of its own daled amos. 
> Perhaps masters of
> one system lack the breadth of those who have crossed over into
> multiple 
> systems.

It makes sense that being exposed to various drachim, atmospheres,
etc. causes intellectual ferment.  Compare to the idea that great
civilizations did not develop in the tropics (heat => people too
lazy, don't have work hard to build shelter from the cold, etc.) but
in temperate zones.

Dr. Chaim Soloveitchik, in his two-semester course dealing with the
history of Rishonim pointed out how in each area (e.g., France,
Christian Spain) there would generally be a couple of great thinkers
in the first few generations (e.g. Rabbeinu Tam, Ri) and then the
innovation would start ossifying so that the next generations would
be merely repeating what the earlier generations said (e.g. for the
Ba'alei Hatosfot, the Ri was the last great mechadesh; his talmidim
started making likutim called Tosafot).  The exception to this rule
was Christian Spain, where you had four generations of mechadshim:
Ramban, Rashba, Ritva, Ran.

Today, with the greater mixing of communities, drachim, etc., there
is more of an opportunity for stagnant communities to reinvent
themselves.

> 
> IOW ze v'zeh goreim.  From what I understand, RYGB has experience
> in Telshe, Ner
> Yisroel, Chabad, Hirschian, etc.  Ok, RYGB, do you see your own
> brand of 
> synthisis as responsible for your creativity, orginality etc.?  Are
> others out 
> there, like myself, hybrids of several schools?

I guess you can say that I'm a hybrid of Sha'alvim (two years, late
teens), YU, Gush (early 20s), and Bernard Revel (mid 20s).  There's
no doubt that my thinking has changed dramatically since my early
bochur days --ask Eli Clark, who was my chavusa at Harvard both the
year before I went to Gush (when I made typically
"Sha'alvim"--yeshivish-- arguments, in contrast to his "Gush"
arguments) and the year after.

Shabbat Shalom.
Moshe
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

On Fri, 30 Apr 1999, Sammy Ominsky wrote:

> Does this imply that the populations of Y and Z were always exactly equal?
>

One on one was inaccurate. What I meant is that you must provide half your
property for an individual, and he can assign zechuyos to you only. Thus,
it is unlikely that the arrangement was maintained throughout history to
the same extent as the original contract.

YGB

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

On Fri, 30 Apr 1999 richard_wolpoe@ibi.com wrote:

> Or IOW why don't we say Moshe Rabbeinu ZTL, etc.?
> 

I don't kno, but I thought we had a takkana not to use these honorifics
here on Avodah. Micha?

YGB

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

On Fri, 30 Apr 1999 richard_wolpoe@ibi.com wrote:

> IOW ze v'zeh goreim.  From what I understand, RYGB has experience in
> Telshe, Ner Yisroel, Chabad, Hirschian, etc.  Ok, RYGB, do you see your
> own brand of synthisis as responsible for your creativity, orginality
> etc.?  Are others out there, like myself, hybrids of several schools? 
> 
> Rich Wolpoe
> 

Yes.

The list of institutions I actually attended that influenced my thinking,
from early youth:

HANC
Chorev
Netiv Meir
Chofetz Chaim
Sha'alvim
Ner Israel (JHU)
Mir Yerushalayim
Mir NY
Yeshiva of Far Roackaway (Kollel)
Brisk Chicago (Kollel)
HTC (Kollel)

And those I did not that influenced my thinking by study and indirect
contact (beginning with the 19th century):

Mir Mir
Grodno
Chabad
Telshe
Slabodka
Novardock
Hildesheimer Seminary
Frankfurt
Chaim Berlin
Torah vo'Da'as
YU
Piaseczna
Dvinsk
Kelm
Lublin

etc. I should hope the list is not exhaustive!

YGB

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

REC: >>Let us examine this question through a halakhic lens.  Generally, as we 
all know, a karov is disqualified from edut.  The reason, presumably, is 
negi'ut ba-davar.  Is anyone aware of any exception to this rule that
applies to talmidei hakhamim or gedolei ha-dor? This rule, of course, is limited
to the beit din.<<

I have no source except sevoro but here goes anyway!

It seems obvious that the reason Sanhedrin needed 70 was to get a good 
cress-section of differing communities, shitos etc. The entire structure was 
geared to avoid a narrow few as welles as by strarting with the most junior, 
avoiding a "yes-man" syndrome.  (Not that 70 Jews will agree on much anyway 
<smile>).

This fits in with ein don yechid elo echod.  No individual has divine 
obejctivity. The more serious the situation, the larger the Beis Din.  There is 
a pattern at work here.

So 2 points:
1) An individual Gadol is OK w/o necessarily being objective.  It's ok that a 
Misnaged favors misnagdus, or that a Hirshcian favors Hisrch or that a 
Soloveichik favors Brisk, etc.
2) However, large-scale comunity deicsions are best left up to a Vaad, or a BD, 
etc. as a "cehck and balance to any one <hypothetical> charismatic figure.

The Torah did not exempt Gedolim or Avos from the influences of human nature.  
What makes us think differently?  Does the conecpt that a Gadol's yestzei horo 
is perhaps qualitatively different imply a lacks of yetzer horo completely?

Rav Yoseif Weiss taught us re: YD that he refuses to believe that a poseik is 
beshito machmir or meikel, IOW each one approaches it objectively and not with 
some pre-set agenda.  I partially agree/disagree.   I agree that no poseik would
issue a psak consciously obscuring an issue by imposing a given shito or 
hashkofo. I disagree in that despite that, there ARE patterns at work - probably
at the unconcsious level. 

If poskim were all totaly objective, then how did it come about that the 
Shulchan Aruch favored Sefardi minhog while the Mappo favored Ahskenazi minhog? 
If Each seifer was halachically obejctive and unbiased to their communities, 
each seifer should have had a mixture of both Ash. and Sef.?!

Rich Wolpoe 

>>> I would say R. Schwab himself would have been honest enough <smile> to admit
> that he was not objective all the time.  
===> But, in this area, I think that we can "argue" that he *was* trying 
to be objective...  (See how he wrote his response...).
- --Zvi<<<

Agreed. 

>Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1999 19:58:22 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Moshe Feldman <moshe_feldman@yahoo.com>
>Exactly my point.  If you read the previous poster, you'll realize
>that the only way to stop the YU bashing (YU etc. can't produce
>gedolim; only right-wing Orthodoxy can) is to take the discussion to
>its obvious conclusion.
>This issue underlies a lot of what Jewish Observer
>& Yated Neeman are about.  The black eye that YU/Centrist Orthodoxy
>suffers is directly related to this.  This is a hashkafic issue of
>great importance.  To sweep it under the rug is unfair because the
>"assumption" of the discussion is that YU can't produce gedolim.

If you look in the archives here you will find that  this type of
hashkafic discussion 
has generally turned into "bashing" and not "discussion" on ALL sides. 
At one
point this forum was close to shutting down over this.  Unfortunately
most people
can not discuss this highly charged hashkafic issue without showing why
their hashkafa is the superior derekh.  That is what leads us to the 
"unproductive lashon hara,  letzonus". 
Why do we have to defend or castigate the Observer or the Yated.  There
are plenty
of other topics that are of great importance.  
Shabbat Shalom 

Saul
___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

On Fri, 30 Apr 1999, saul guberman wrote:

> If you look in the archives here you will find that this type of
> hashkafic discussion has generally turned into "bashing" and not
> "discussion" on ALL sides. At one point this forum was close to shutting
> down over this.  Unfortunately most people can not discuss this highly
> charged hashkafic issue without showing why their hashkafa is the
> superior derekh.  That is what leads us to the "unproductive lashon
> hara, letzonus".  Why do we have to defend or castigate the Observer or
> the Yated.  There are plenty of other topics that are of great
> importance.  Shabbat Shalom
> 
> Saul
> 

Seconded!

YGB

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

It seems poshut that R. Schwab as a salaried employee of KAJ was a nogeia re: 
THAT kehillo. And KAJ considers itself the proper successor to the 
Frankfort/Hirschian Kehillo.

I wonder if odom korov eitzel atzmo could be re-cast as rav korov eitzel 
kehilosso? <smile>  

Rich Wolpoe

--- saul guberman <saulguberman@juno.com> wrote:
> If you look in the archives here you will find that  this type of
> hashkafic discussion 
> has generally turned into "bashing" and not "discussion" on ALL
> sides. 
> At one
> point this forum was close to shutting down over this. 
> Unfortunately
> most people
> can not discuss this highly charged hashkafic issue without showing
> why
> their hashkafa is the superior derekh.  That is what leads us to
> the 
> "unproductive lashon hara,  letzonus". 

If this is the case, I am willing to go along with the collective
decision of the list to declare the entire topic "off-limits." 
However, it's not right that when YU is attacked no one complains,
but when YU is defended, people decide to close down the discussion. 
If you have an "off-limits" policy it should be equally enforced.

Shabbat Shalom.
Moshe

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

B'li ayin hara I have 9 children at home. This means two things to the readers
of this list:

1- I already have to break up far more fights than I have any desire to.

2- I don't necessarily have the ability to catch every offence the moment it
   happens.

Do we really have to go through this garbage every so often?

In the short term, please terminate the following two threads:
    * R. Sc[h]wab as Nogei'ah
    * The whole Gedolim Thing

In the long term, I prefer one month hiatuses to "permanently closing" a topic
whose exploration may have value. For example, "gadol" is an oft brandied about
but poorly defined term. We ought to tackle it one day -- once things cool off.


Now, when is Pesach in 2038? You do realize that's only a couple of months
after much UNIX-based software fails in a "y2k"-like tragedy.... <grin>

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 30-Apr-99: Shishi, Emor
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H O"Ch 316:19-25
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Eruvin 73a
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         Haftorah

In a message dated 4/30/99 3:32:06 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
moshe_feldman@yahoo.com writes:

<<  Unfortunately
 > most people
 > can not discuss this highly charged hashkafic issue without showing
 > why
 > their hashkafa is the superior derekh.  That is what leads us to
 > the 
 > "unproductive lashon hara,  letzonus". 
 
 If this is the case, I am willing to go along with the collective
 decision of the list to declare the entire topic "off-limits." 
 However, it's not right that when YU is attacked no one complains,
 but when YU is defended, people decide to close down the discussion. 
 If you have an "off-limits" policy it should be equally enforced.
 
 Shabbat Shalom.
 Moshe >>

I would go one step further than Moshe. I deliberately posted a very rough 
criticism of R' Eider, not as a knock on him, although I feel he is not above 
criticism, but because there are so many different ways in which 
circumstances shape events, statements, shitos, etc., that there will always 
be a gray area in which personal and philosophical views intersect and in 
those areas, even a great educator like R' Eider will have to face some kind 
of criticism. The fact is that the YU world has never cultivated the Gedolim 
obsession that is found in other parts of Judaism, with the exception of the 
Rav, even though many of its Rebbeim would have been considered Gedolim had 
they been aligned with other institutions. I am thinking now not of obvious 
candidates, like R. David Lifschitz, O"H, but like R. Nissan Alpert, O"H, 
R.Arnest, O"H, and many others whose names are alas fading into obscurity. 
Yet if I disagreed with things they have said and done, I would not hesitate 
to criticize them. There are Rabbonim there now, such as Herschel Schacter, 
who I revere as a Gadol, and yet at the same time, I can criticize what I 
feel are things he has said and done that are wrong, even though I am not 
worthy to shine his shoes. That is because as a Gadol, he is a public figure, 
whose actions outside of the realm of the shiur he delivers have a great 
impact on the Jewish community, even though the only reason he gets to say or 
do those things is because he is a Gadol. Thus, not to bring up a sore 
subject, he can in an article criticize Women's Teffilot based on what he 
perceives as the motivations of the people involved, and at that point, has 
to be willing to be vulnerable to my criticisms. But in the more right wing 
world, even though the only reason I would criticize or question is for the 
same goal of search for Emes, and the good of the greater community, (in my 
opinion only), I am not allowed, because the cult of Gedolim doesn't give me 
that Rishus. That doesn't seem quite fair, and furthermore, doesn't allow us 
the right to make the personal criticisms which are directly related to 
communal or philosophical issues.

Jordan

>Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1999 19:58:22 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Moshe Feldman <moshe_feldman@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Re: My Gadol is bigger than your Gadol
>Rather, the entire system of gedolim, politics, etc. is the
>issue.  No one denies that there are gedolim in right-wing circles. 
>The question is how do you determine who is.

I am assuming that when we refer to a Gadol, that we are not just referring
to a "big" Talmid Chochom or the community Posiek but rather one who is at the next level of being (capable of) also a manhig/teacher for large\multiple segments of Klal Yisrael.
Speaking only for myself, for me to decide who is or isn't a Gadol is
ridiculous! What kind of yardstick am I to use to make this determination?
Because I "feel" that this shito is superior or makes more sense? Or is it
that I heard his shiurim/read his seforim and felt them resonate inside? I
think that for most people Gadlus is based on who you know has that type of respect for a particular person - IOW my Rov/Rosh Yeshiva/Rebbi/
/neighborhood Talmid Chochom says/feels that So-and-So is a Gadol.
 

One of purposes of Avodah and its parent body, The Aishdas Sociey, is the
conscious endeavor to form a new sociological stratum within Orthodoxy,
one the transcends prior, restrictive, divisive and regressive divisions
to create a more positive, uplifting, educated and dynamic group of Ovdei
Hashem b'mo'ach va'lev.

Defending/Attacking definitions of "Gedolim" or shortcoming therefrom is
very harmful to this purpose. Let us, as our self-selected group,
acknowledge internally the broad array of Gedolim we posses, and leave for
other forums and venues debates and deputes concerning such issues.

YGB

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

    Rav Kasher develops an entire volume (13 - Bo#2) of his Torah
Shelemah to also every aspect of the calendar including all the shittot,
Hillel II and R. Saadiah Gaon.

    I have one question of the calendar that has bothered me for years.
It would seem that the use of a set calendar was a gradual process
over many generations (see Rav Kasher). Nevertheless, the Takanah of
Hillel II should have caused major impact on Babylonian Jewry.
Nevertheless there is almost no reference to this major event in the
Gemara even though it took place in the days of Rava and Abaye, well
before the Gemara was completed by Rav Ashi.

1. In the gemaras that discuss the calendar it is never clear whether
   it occurred before or after Hillel II. 
   Certainly according to Rambam before Hillel II the second day of Yom
   Tov was a safek and afterwards a minhag and so had major halachic
   implications.

2. The Gemara in Beitzah 4b uses the phrase "anan yadia kevia deyarchi"
   in different meaning within a few words of each - which is confusing
   in the least. Thus, even this Gemara is far from clear that it
   refers to Hillel II.

3. The Rambam seems to refer to keeping 2 days YomTov in galut today as
   a minhag rather than a takkanat chazal. I would have called it a
   takkanah of the Sanhedrin under Hillel II.

4.  I think that Hillel II is first mentioned bt Rabbenu Chananel.
    The rishonim seem to be very confused exactly who he was with some
    claiming he is a son or grandson of Rav Yehudah nesiah which is obviously
    too early. 
    The gemara in Beitzah uses the general phrase - shulchu me-tam.
    Why all this obscurity about a major figure during the time of the
    Gemara?

One gets the impression that there was an effort to downplay this event.

Kol Tuv,
Eli Turkel

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


[ Distributed to the Avodah mailing list, digested version.                   ]
[ To post: mail to avodah@aishdas.org                                         ]
[ For back issues: mail "get avodah-digest vXX.nYYY" to majordomo@aishdas.org ]
[ or, the archive can be found at http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/              ]
[ For general requests: mail the word "help" to majordomo@aishdas.org         ]