Avodah Mailing List

Volume 13 : Number 026

Sunday, May 23 2004

• Donating wigs
• I ought to take out a patent :-)
• Re: pikuach nefesh & shabbat
• Re: Tikkun Leil Shavuot Material
• Indian hair, Sheitels and AZ
• RE: Donating wigs
• Re: Donating wigs
• sheitels
• Lifnei Iver for Ben Noach
• Minchat Chinuch 436: destroying AZ and meshamsheha
• Science lishmah
• Re: About the water controversy
• Re: Maaseh Rav

> Assuming that these wigs are avodah zara, and are assur b'hanaah,
> would it be mutar to donate them to cancer patients (non jewish)?
> (making sure not to take any tax benefits from them)

There is a letter on that very subject in today's NY TIMES letters to the 
editor section.

Michael Feldstein
Stamford, CT

Assuming the Hindu-hair derived shaitl is only a meshamshei avoda zara,
and since we're not mechuyav to burn meshamshei AZ (AZ 51b), and since
we don't hold by the Ketzot haChoshen 273:11 understanding of the Rambam
Hilchot Nedarim 2:14 on HEFKER but go by the GRA there (CM 273): why not
hire John J. Goy, announce in front of a kosher witness that "my wig is
hefker", have John J. Goy take ownership, then denigrate it (e.g. by
spitting on it)? A goy can mevatel his AZ. John J. Goy then leaves it
on the ground muttering "Who wants this garbage anyway?". Our Yiddineh
then picks up the wig, washes it and we all live happily ever after.

Of course if the hair is takruvot AZ then "forget about it".

I ought to take out a patent on this :-)

KT
Josh

From: Akiva Atwood <akiva@atwood.co.il>
>> The rav took it for granted that the sefard/ashkenaz refers to the
>> doctor/helper and not to the patient. However, several of us were not
>> convinced.

>WHy would it apply to the patient? The doctor is the one doing the
>melacha, after all.

But, the patient is benefitting from the melacha, is he not?
--
Frederick J. Stone

I thought I'd kick off my attempt this year prior to Shavuot so people
might remember to take home any interesting maareh mkomot sheets from
shiurim they attend.

At Micha's suggestion, I've faxed him my inadequate attempt ( 4 -
2 sided pages) at something called:

Bat Kol- Diaphanous Direction or Diversionary Dialogue

[See <http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/basKol.pdf> -mi]

One interesting source relates to an old topic of ours-elu v'elu. R' Moshe
in a tshuva (Y"D 3:92) to his son R'Reuven states "nimtzah shebetzem
limud hatora leka davar sheino emet bdirei chazal bein bdivrei b"s bein
bdivrei b"h..."

KT
Joel Rich

Just to clarify one thing, Rav Dovid Feinstein has said that one should
not wear shaitels until it has been verified that your shaitel is okay.

Also, I believe Rav Moshe's psak is only m'pi hashemua and is not
in writing.

> Assuming that these wigs are avodah zara, and are assur b'hanaah,
> would it be mutar to donate them to cancer patients (non jewish)?
> (making sure not to take any tax benefits from them)

I asked my LOR, who replied: 

Based on Rav Moshe's psak, yes.
According to Rav Elyashiv, no.

Akiva

On Thu, May 20, 2004 at 10:14:52PM +0300, Akiva Atwood wrote:
: > Assuming that these wigs are avodah zara, and are assur b'hanaah,
: > would it be mutar to donate them to cancer patients (non jewish)?
..
: I asked my LOR, who replied: 

: Based on Rav Moshe's psak, yes.
: According to Rav Elyashiv, no.

How is tzedaqah a form of hana'ah? Mitzvos lav leihanos nitenu.

:-)BBii!
-mi

 From Today's JPost
> Thirteen years ago, nonagenarian sage{nb Rabbi} Elyashiv and the late
> Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Auerbach permitted Indian hair wigs, based on
> on-site research and by testimony by American professors of
> Hinduism. However, the rite has changed since then, explained associates
> of {nb Rabbi}Elyashiv.

Is this explanation based on factual evidence of change in the Hindu
rites? Interesting question- Do we go by what the participant thinks
about (or at least what the majority think about) or by what gdolei
hinduism say are the proper kavanot?

KT
Joel Rich

Someone in private email questioned my suggestion re: making wig hefker
and having a goy take possession since there would a problem of Lifnei
Iver. Look at the Minchat Chinuch 232 d"h v'gam nireh li pashut" and
the next paragraph. Even the dagul Mirevava YD 151 wouldn't consider
this b'meyzid.

KT
Josh

Interesting Minchat Chinuch 436: it's not that you're "over" on a mitzvat
lo taaseh, it's that you have not fulfilled a mitzvat aseh. BTW the
Minchat Chinuch 436 d"h v'noheg specifically states that a Ben Noach is
NOT mechuyav to destroy AZ.

KT
Josh

I am due to be giving a shiur on Shavuot about the concept of science
lishmah - the idea that we should be studying science in the context of
Ma'ase Bereshit. This is talked about in More Nevuchim, Menorat HaMaor
etc who quotes a few sugyot in Masechet Shabbat. I was hoping to also
bring some more Mekorot - also Rishonim if I can. Particularly of interest
would be shu't on learning science in the context of Avodat Hahem,
questions of bittul torah etc. Also loic and mathematics as important.
I have often heard the quote from the GRA tha someone who has a problem
in math, will have a hundred problem in Toah. Where can I find this?
Just perhaps a quick list of mekorot on this issues would be greatly
appreciated.

Thank you in advance.
Jonathan Cohen
jcoh003@ec.auckland.ac.nz

R' Melech Press wrote <<< While Rav Moshe Feinstein held that one must
be able to see what is clearly a "bug," both Rav Shlomo Zalman z"l and
Rav Elyashiv held that if it is visible, even as a speck, and might be
a bug it requires b'dika >>>

When RSZ and RE made the above psakim, did they specify what *kind*
of bedika would be required?

It is very difficult for me to imagine that their psak could have been
"if it is visible, even as a speck, and might be a bug, then you must look
again with a magnifying glass", because if so, then how would this bedika
have been performed before magnifying glasses were invented? Would they
have said "This is a safek bug, and current technology doesn't allow us
to resolve that question"? Or would they have said "This is too small
to be assur", in which case it would not be assur today either.

Or perhaps what RSZ and RE meant was "if it is visible, even as a speck,
and might be a bug, then you must look again very carefully, but a naked
eye is sufficient". This seems to me much more likely.

Are these psakim published anywhere? Can we determine which they meant?

Akiva Miller

Avodah V13 #21 dated 5/12/04 
>(Moved here from an Areivim thread titled "RSRH and the Opera", 

A great deal of Torah has been spun off of the question, "What can we
learn from the 'fact' that RSRH went to the opera?" -- but I must again
protest on avodah as I did on arvm (to no effect, alas). There is no
evidence that RSRH ever went to an opera.

The quoted book said he went to a "Wagner concert," another person
claimed that the concert *must* have really been an opera, and away we
go, spinning long strings of Torah and speculation.

One thread had to do with whether it was L'H to say that RSRH went to
the opera. I would say that it certainly is -- if you have no evidence
that he ever did.

Recently I met an older woman from Frankfurt (a woman whose *mother*
had actually taught in Cracow in Sarah Schenirer's Bais Yakov!) and
I asked her if she had any knowledge of whether RSRH had ever gone to
the opera. She said that many frum people did so in Germany, but that
very few rabbanim did so.

She thought it was not impossible, but extremely unlikely. In the
absence of explicit eyewitness testimony that he definitely went,
she would reject any allegation that RSRH "probably" went. To repeat,
according to her, it was uncommon even for much lesser rabbanim than
RSRH to go to the opera.

>  Rather, when we see him commit something which appears to
> be wrong, we are obligated to presume that unusual circumstances exist,
> or he holds like a shita that we're unaware of, or -- if all other
> limud zechus fails -- that he did teshuva immediately thereafter. [--RAM]

And please keep in mind that when someone says without proof that HE
thinks Rav X did such and such, *we* have not *seen* him commit anything.

> This thread began by mentioning reports that RSR Hirsch had attended
> certain events, and some would like to use this Maaseh Rav to teach us
> a leniency (even though, as I see it, this is difficult to do without
> RSRH himself telling us what his reasoning was). [--RAM]

Before we learn out any leniencies about kol isha from this Maaseh Rav,
we should discuss whether we are all committing an aveira by assuming,
without evidence, that this alleged ma'aseh rav ever happened.

  Omer Day 45
 -Toby Katz
=============

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


[ 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         ]