Volume 28: Number 226
Sat, 05 Nov 2011
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Message: 1
From: "Rich, Joel" <JR...@sibson.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 11:10:20 -0400
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Aveira Lishmah
So my question is: GIVEN that a certain action is assur, why on earth would the Gadol Hador advise someone to violate the halacha?
Akiva Miller
____________________________________________________________
Lshitatcha isn't another question would the CI be punished for giving this psak/advice?
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.
Go to top.
Message: 2
From: Saul.Z.New...@kp.org
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 07:45:09 -0700
Subject: [Avodah] Akum issues
http://onthemainline.blogspot.com/2011/11/controversial-acro
nym-akum-also-how.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20111104/ac066925/attachment-0001.htm>
Go to top.
Message: 3
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2011 11:28:33 -0400
Subject: Re: [Avodah] mabul
On 4/11/2011 5:58 AM, Micha Berger wrote:
> But more importantly
> I didn't see the story of flying up in that gemara.
You're right. I misremembered seeing it there.
--
Zev Sero If they use these guns against us once, at that moment
z...@sero.name the Oslo Accord will be annulled and the IDF will
return to all the places that have been given to them.
- Yitzchak Rabin
Go to top.
Message: 4
From: "Elazar M. Teitz" <r...@juno.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 15:10:57 GMT
Subject: Re: [Avodah] The Case Of The Missing Tallis �
RDYL quotes an article which states: >Ashkenazic tradition is to wear
a Talis (gadol) in Shul even at times when such is not generally worn by
the congregation at large, for example at a weekday mincha davening, when
one is carrying out certain tasks, e.g. acting as the , or , leading the
prayers and representing the congregation. The same goes for when leading
the evening tefilloh commonly referred to as
�maariv�, when getting an aliyah or leining at of ,
and other occasions.
This practice is faithfully followed to the present day in (German)
Ashkenazic congregations, as well as elsewhere, such as Lithuanian type
Yeshivos, and such �Yeshivishe minyonim�.
In other places, e.g. many Eastern European Ashkenazic Shuls, there has
been an erosion in this aspect of the Ashkenazic tradition, due to, it
seems, Chassidic influence, as well as perhaps modern trends toward
informality. In such places, one can see people going to the amud to lead
the services at maariv, and sometimes even at mincha, without a tallis
gadol. And also leining and going up for aliyos at mincha of Shabbos
similarly< When in Israel, I daven at the Gra Shul in Sha'arei
Chesed. It is far from a hotbed "modern trends towards informality." It
is also far from "East European Ashkenazic." Yet a tallis is not donned
specifically for serving as shaliach tzibbur or bal koyre, at any t'filla.
A jacket is de rigeur; a tallis is not. In European yeshivas, it was
not necessarily a tallis that was donned. Wearing a coat worn in the
manner of a tallis -- i.e., with the sleeves hanging down, rather than
having the hands inserted in them -- was acceptable. If on
e consults the sources at the end of the article cited, it will be noted
that with the exception of the Aruch Hashulchan, they say "l'hisateif."
They do not specify that it be "l'hisateif b'tallis." It would appear to
be a matter of donning an extra garment lichvod hat'filla, rather than an
obligation to wear a tallis. (None of the sources cited mention a need
for a tallis for k'rias haTorah.) If so, then in a society in which
jackets are not the norm, donning a jacket for davening would satisfy this
requirement. EMT
____________________________________________________________
Penny Stock Jumping 3000%
Sign up to the #1 voted penny stock newsletter for free today!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4eb400d7d3f5310d4806st05vuc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20111104/79cce547/attachment-0001.htm>
Go to top.
Message: 5
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2011 11:34:38 -0400
Subject: Re: [Avodah] The daf yomi in Chulin 128a Tanaim hold the the
On 4/11/2011 12:24 AM, hankman wrote:
> The daf yomi in Chulin 128a both the Tana Kama and R. Shimon hold the
> the kishus planted in an otsits sh?aino nakuf and whose branch is
> protruding over the edge is yonaik min ha?aretz derech ha?avir. Can
> anyone explain just what the plant is obtaining from the aretz that
> would cause the plant to still be considered mechubor la?aretz? The
> co2, o2 and water vapor are all obtained directly (just) from the
> atmosphere and not from aretz via the atmosphere. What am I missing
> here?
And what does a plant get in an otzitz nokuv? How does the power in the
earth jump the gap between the ground and the hole at the bottom of the
pot? And in what way do plants in holed pots grow better than those in
unholed ones?
AIUI the theory in those days was that the power to grow comes from the
earth. When you plant a seed it was thought to rot completely, so that
none of it was left, and then the power of growth that is in the earth
produces a new plant that follows the template of the seed it was given.
I'm not sure how they understood why plants can grow in unholed pots.
And I'm pretty sure they'd have thought hydroponics impossible.
--
Zev Sero If they use these guns against us once, at that moment
z...@sero.name the Oslo Accord will be annulled and the IDF will
return to all the places that have been given to them.
- Yitzchak Rabin
Go to top.
Message: 6
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2011 11:41:28 -0400
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Tefila Over Loudspeakers At a Big Gatherings
On 4/11/2011 6:47 AM, Prof. Levine wrote:
> Similarly he says if you are standing in a minyan and cannot hear the
> chazzan, but only know that amen is being said because you hear it on
> the speaker system, then you may answer amen together with the
> Tzibbur. Not because you are answering to the loudspeaker but rather
> because you are part of a minyan. Although you do not technically
> hear what they are saying, the loudspeaker indicates this to you.
> However if you are not standing in the presence of the minyan you may
> not answer. (Halichos Shlomo, Tefila 22:15)
Why not? No matter where you are, you know that a bracha has just been
said, so why shouldn't you say amen? Why is it necessary either to have
heard the speaker say it, *or* to be in the same tzibbur as those who
heard it? The issur on saying amen to a bracha you haven't heard is only
because you don't know whether it was to Hashem or to AZ; in this case you
know that it was to Hashem, so isn't it right and proper to acknowledge it
with an amen? If someone were standing outside the Alexandria synagogue
and through the window saw the flag waving, and thus knew that a bracha had
just been said,should he not answer amen?!
--
Zev Sero If they use these guns against us once, at that moment
z...@sero.name the Oslo Accord will be annulled and the IDF will
return to all the places that have been given to them.
- Yitzchak Rabin
Go to top.
Message: 7
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2011 11:59:00 -0400
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Is there any issur here al pi halacha? - New
On 4/11/2011 11:11 AM, Micha Berger wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 03:23:13PM -0400, Rich, Joel wrote:
> : Not only that, but even if nobody is offering money and you are donating
> : your water, you can give it to whomever you like. "Ve'ish es kodoshov lo
> : yihyu". There are no rules...
No, I wrote that. If RJR were to use standard quoting conventions, this
sort of confusion wouldn't happen.
> I therefore assume you both are relying on a poetic extension of Rashi's
> point (chazal's point as quoted by Rashi) -- a person may choose to give
> *tzedaqah* to whomever he wants.
It's not poetic, it's exactly the same principle, only even stronger.
The Torah tells us that even that which you have to give remains your
property until you give it, and thus you have the right to choose the
recipient. Kal vachomer that which you have no obligation to give in
the first place remains yours even after you've decided to give it away,
and you can choose the recipient. And kal vachomer ben beno shel kal
vachomer that if you haven't yet decided to give it away you can choose
to sell it instead. This is not a drasha, it's what the pasuk means.
> An exteme example: May I give a formerly wealthy person his limo as a
> "dei machsero" when I know of a poor person who hasn't eaten in 3 days
> and is omeid lamus?
Is this latter person "lefanai"? May I choose that moment not to give
anything at all to either of them? Then I can also choose to whom to
give it. Only the public kupah, which belongs to everybody, must
therefore follow objective rules.
--
Zev Sero If they use these guns against us once, at that moment
z...@sero.name the Oslo Accord will be annulled and the IDF will
return to all the places that have been given to them.
- Yitzchak Rabin
Go to top.
Message: 8
From: "kennethgmil...@juno.com" <kennethgmil...@juno.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 16:26:55 GMT
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Is there any issur here al pi halacha?
R' Micha Berger asked:
> I therefore assume you both are relying on a poetic extension of
> Rashi's point (chazal's point as quoted by Rashi) -- a person
> may choose to give *tzedaqah* to whomever he wants. This might
> be true in general, but it is true when issues like "lo saamod"
> are involved? An exteme example: May I give a formerly wealthy
> person his limo as a "dei machsero" when I know of a poor person
> who hasn't eaten in 3 days and is omeid lamus?
>
> And if not, then how do we know I can extend my general liberty
> of choice of tzedaqah recipient to cases where I'm deciding mi
> yichyeh umi yamus?
The case is not clear. I'm not sure what the choices are. Specifically,
what is the method by which I might help the one who is omeid lamus? I'm
going to presume that the only thing I have available to give as tzedaka is
this limo (which can be given only to one of these two people), and that
the poor person will be able to sell it for food. Any other scenario would
not link the two options, and my choices would be one, the other, both, or
neither.
My guess is that this case is unusual, because "omeid lamus" takes it out
of the ordinary tzedakah category, and puts it in pikuach nefesh, and I
would have to give it to the starving man. But if not for that, I'd be able
to give it to either or neither.
But that's not really relevant to the kidney question, because even if the
poor person is in front of me, and is truly omeid lamus, even pikuach
nefesh is not enough to force me to donate my kidney. Because of the danger
of the surgery, I am never obligated to donate it. Even if I have decided
to risk the surgery, and give the kidney to A or to B, I am never forced to
do so, as I can always change my mind entirely. Therefore, I would think
that since it is ultimately voluntary, I can make whatever deals I wish.
But here's an interesting twist: Suppose I do offer my kidney to a specific
person for whatever reason, financial or not. As I wrote, since it is
voluntary, I should be able to designate whichever recipient my whim
prefers. If I am correct to this point, here's a question: Once the kidney
has been removed, are the surgeons allowed - or perhaps even required - to
override my directive, and implant it in the patient who is halachically
more entitled? We're dealing with dinei nefashos here, and can't be
bothered with trifles like who actually owns this kidney - if anyone indeed
owns it at all! (Citation: "One is not the owner of his own body.")
Akiva Miller
____________________________________________________________
The New "Skinny" Fruit
How This Strange 62-Cent African Fruit Is Making Americans Skinny.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4eb4129d22e5f10d9ea5st06vuc
Go to top.
Message: 9
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 15:13:05 -0400
Subject: Re: [Avodah] The daf yomi in Chulin 128a Tanaim hold the
On Fri, Nov 04, 2011 at 11:01:26AM -0400, hankman wrote:
:> Think of the words metzi'us or mamashus -- the world is as people
:> experience it first-hand, not as how we can objectively deduce it is
:> through tools and further reason.
:
: As I wrote the last time we discussed science in the gemara (achbor)
: this kind of answer leaves me unsatisfied. I would expect that the
: gemara be scientifically correct as well unless we accept R. Slifkin's
: premise which I used to assume myself prior to many gedolim banning his
: books. Now I am simply conflicted whenever I encounter this issue.
"Leaves me unsatisfied" is not proof that an idea is false.
We live in an era where rapid scientific and engineering progress has
been going on for so long that poeple take it for granted. Coginitive
Man and his quest to "umil'u es haaretz *vekivshuha" is so good at
controlling and mastering his environment, we see the whole world
through his eyes.
This assumption that everything must be scientific is why the Man of
Faith is lonelier today than ever before.
I think the zeitgeist is broken, and misleading you into seeking answers
to questions that aren't real.
:> Besides, where does the vapor come from? At the height of an herb or
:> vegetable, isn't most of it evaporating off the ground right below
:> the branch?
:
: I thought about that too, but I doubt it is the answer. I think most of
: the water vapor is from the atmosphere mostly taken up over the oceans
: and large bodies of water. There is precious little evaporation going
: on over ordinary soil except perhaps immediately after a heavy rain and
: this is not likely to sustain a plant...
But a plant that is over a puddle is noticably damper. Scientifically,
it might not make such a difference, that what I notice is change from
the norm and not a large percentage of the water. Which is why I gave
a two-part answer.
: Air does not move in straight lines of site like
: a light ray, but wafts about all over in eddies etc. and could get to
: the plant even within the lip of the otsits and this would be recognized
: even just psychologically by the hamon am of their day as well.
Think about how you think about a plant. Most of the water comes from
under it, and then there is also water from elsewhere. Ther issue isn't
one of majority (a measurably quantity) but of iqar (what people consider
essential).
:-)BBii!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger Take time,
mi...@aishdas.org be exact,
http://www.aishdas.org unclutter the mind.
Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rabbi Simcha Zissel Ziv, Alter of Kelm
Go to top.
Message: 10
From: T6...@aol.com
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 15:07:24 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Aveira Lishmah
From: "kennethgmil...@juno.com" <kennethgmil...@juno.com>
> The dilemma; there are many things that one can build on the plot
> that was once a shul. One of the things that can not be built
> there is a mikvah! If the rabbi allows for the building of the
> mikvah he is violating the halachah; if he doesn't then the
> community will not have a mikvah at all. What should he do?
>
> The perplexed Rabbi decided to consult with the sagacious Chazon
> Ish. (Rabbi Avrohom Yeshaya Karelitz, (1878-1953)
>
> The Chazon Ish answered, "If you build the mikvah you will be
> punished by G-d for violating the Halachah. However, as the Rabbi
> you should accept this punishment upon yourself so that the
> community will have a Mikvah!"
>
Akiva Miller
>>>>>
I would have liked to hear the Chazon Ish's tone of voice and see the
expression on his face and know the whole conversation, the whole context. It
is possible to say, "So take the punishment" in a tone and a context that
implies, "It's not really assur under certain circumstances and there isn't
really going to be a punishment." The Chazon Ish is not generally known to
have advocated the abrogation of halacha for the sake of expediency so I'd
guess this whole story is missing something.
--Toby Katz
================
_____________________
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20111104/c6b06a1b/attachment-0001.htm>
Go to top.
Message: 11
From: "Rich, Joel" <JR...@sibson.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 17:14:16 -0400
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Tefila Over Loudspeakers At a Big Gatherings
If someone were standing outside the Alexandria synagogue
and through the window saw the flag waving, and thus knew that a bracha had
just been said,should he not answer amen?!
--
Zev Sero
_______________________________________________
Quite a few opinions on this - see mfarshim on sukkah 51b. Some say they knew which bracha was being said.
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.
Go to top.
Message: 12
From: Meir Rabi <meir...@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2011 01:15:24 +1100
Subject: [Avodah] What was AA's Hetter to endanger his people
AAAH ran to save Lot. He engaged in battle against well trained soldiers in
order to save Lot.
Are we permitted/obligated to endanger the lives of many in order to save
the life of an individual?
Was he relying on the assumption that he had the element of surprise and
that they were war weary?
The ShAharon quotes a Zohar that in fact AAAH went to redeem Lot with $$
but when he noted that he was accompanied by invincible angels he engaged
in battle instead.
--
Best,
Meir G. Rabi
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20111106/8021e4fa/attachment-0001.htm>
Go to top.
Message: 13
From: Meir Rabi <meir...@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2011 01:09:24 +1100
Subject: [Avodah] Avraham would certainly have preferred not to remain
The discussion group appears to have accepted the premise that, Avraham
would certainly have preferred not to remain in the company of Lot, but did
so as a chessed to Lot
I do not think this is such a simple assertion.
Do we assume that being in the company of a family member who is not
inspired by our lofty aspirations will demean and dilute our spiritual
ambitions and accomplishments?
I would assume that the other members of AA's clan were like-minded,
devoted and spiritually inspired people, so one family that did not quite
match the profile may well have served as a counter and a positive
influence.
Some would think in terms of diamond polishing, which is achieved through
abrasion; similarly, as one travels through life and crosses cross,
objectionable people these interactions are the device through which we
become polished. I believe Rabbi A Miller was fond of this imagery.
--
Best,
Meir G. Rabi
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20111106/60ec4138/attachment-0001.htm>
Go to top.
Message: 14
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Sat, 05 Nov 2011 20:07:14 -0400
Subject: Re: [Avodah] What was AA's Hetter to endanger his people
On 5/11/2011 10:15 AM, Meir Rabi wrote:
> AAAH ran to save Lot. He engaged in battle against well trained soldiers in order to save Lot.
> Are we permitted/obligated to endanger the lives of many in order to save the life of an individual?
We are permitted to go to war even if nobody's life is in danger, just
for economic gain. Kal vachomer to save somebody.
--
Zev Sero If they use these guns against us once, at that moment
z...@sero.name the Oslo Accord will be annulled and the IDF will
return to all the places that have been given to them.
- Yitzchak Rabin
Go to top.
Message: 15
From: "Chana Luntz" <Ch...@kolsassoon.org.uk>
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 23:46:48 -0000
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Is there any issur here al pi halacha?
RAM writes:
> It seems to me that RJK's comment is accurate only if the poor person
> could have gotten that kidney through other channels. But if the rich
> person got a kidney which would not have been available any way other
> than via payment, then the poor person could not have gotten it any
> way.
>
> Phrased another way: RJK's comment presumes a fixed number of available
> kidneys. But if market forces are allowed to come into play, it can
> increase the number of available kidneys, because people who had been
> unwilling to donate them, might now be willing to sell them. This
> is indeed good for the donor/seller, and good for the richman/buyer,
> without being bad for the poor man.
>
> BUT!!! Lest anyone think I'm endorsing these organ sales, let's also be
> honest enough to admit that there will indeed be some people who were
> previously willing to donate their kidney to the patient who needs it
> the most, but will now change their mind and offer it only to the
> highest
> bidder. I do NOT deny them the right to do so, but let's all admit that
> this scenario would indeed be bad for the poor man.
But you are missing the most cogent part of RJK's argument - and certainly
the one that is accepted in Britain as being true (RJK is mesupik, which is
why he wants hard data, which I don't know enough about the area to give,
only that it is an "accepted truth" in Britain).
That is, once you bring "market forces" into play, it pushes away the
altruists, so in fact the number of kidneys available from altruistic
sources goes down. In particular, one of the "best" sources for all forms
of organs, and these presumably include kidneys, is from people killed in
some sort of accident - which is the situation when altruistic giving (by
the relatives) tends to be at its height, but once money enters the
equation, most relatives (according to this argument) will not give, not
wanting to take money from the situation. Ah you say, well then let them
give without paying - but once there is a market for such things, most
relatives say - let the market deal with it, and will not agree to give.
The argument thus is that in fact if you pay, you end up with a more
restricted and limited market than you had before for everybody, although
you indeed do have the rich getting a better chance at what there is.
Note of course that the British are big on this, they will not pay for
blood, because they feel they get more and better quality blood from
altruistic giving. Certainly I think that is true for my husband, I cannot
imagine him giving blood for money - I am sure whatever they paid him would
not equal his hourly charge out rate at the office, which is what he would
compare it to. Nor would I imagine the various law firms I worked in
running blood drives for their workers if there was payment. Nor would the
various shuls run blood drives. So most of the people I know who give blood
would stop giving if there was payment, rather assuming that poor people
would pick up the slack. But whether they would I don't know - and indeed,
there is also concern that once payment comes into the equation, there is
greater incentive for people to lie about things like being HIV+ - an
altruist is much less likely to lie, (and again, I don't know about the hard
data, but they certainly claim here that there have been far fewer blood
transfusion problems due to contaminated blood that places where there is
payment).
So you may actually have a situation where not only does the rich get the
kidney and the poor does not, that there are fewer kidneys to go around,
because of reduced altruistic giving, and the kidneys are of poorer quality,
so in fact more people miss out on kidneys overall that will get them from
people prepared to donate and even then...
> (And of course, as I wrote before, I am also fearful that market forces
> could exert undue pressure on some people to sell their kidneys against
> their best interests.
> Akiva Miller
SHavuah tov
Chana
Go to top.
Message: 16
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Sat, 05 Nov 2011 20:11:55 -0400
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Tefila Over Loudspeakers At a Big Gatherings
On 4/11/2011 5:14 PM, Rich, Joel wrote:
>> If someone were standing outside the Alexandria synagogue
>> and through the window saw the flag waving, and thus knew that a bracha
>> had just been said,should he not answer amen?!
> Quite a few opinions on this - see mfarshim on sukkah 51b. Some say they
> knew which bracha was being said.
Even so, when you hear a bracha over a loudspeaker, telephone, radio, etc,
you know what bracha is being said too. So why shouldn't you answer amen?
What do you gain by being part of the same tzibbur?
--
Zev Sero If they use these guns against us once, at that moment
z...@sero.name the Oslo Accord will be annulled and the IDF will
return to all the places that have been given to them.
- Yitzchak Rabin
------------------------------
Avodah mailing list
Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
End of Avodah Digest, Vol 28, Issue 226
***************************************
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..."