Avodah Mailing List

Volume 36: Number 46

Thu, 19 Apr 2018

• 1. Re: The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies (Micha Berger)
• 2. Re: Eating before Biur Chometz (David Riceman)
• 3. Re: The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies (Prof. Levine)
• 4. Subject: Rambam and Pi - was Need For Secular Knowledge (hankman)
• 5. Re: When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz (Akiva Miller)
• 6. Re: Subject: Rambam and Pi - was Need For Secular Knowledge (Zev Sero)
• 7. Re: When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz (Ben Waxman)
• 8. Re: Rambam and Pi (Micha Berger)
• 9. Re: The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies (Prof. Levine)
• 10. Re: When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz (Zev Sero)
• 11. Re: When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz (Akiva Miller)

On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 06:00:38PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote:
: At 01:59 PM 4/17/2018, Micha Berger wrote:
:> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:14:25PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote:
:> : Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a
:> : bdieved.

:> Historically this was true, but maybe because of timing.

: This was not historically true at all. The Talmud torah set up
: by Shearith Israel in the 18th century ...
: Etz Chaim in the late 19th century taught secular subjects ...
: The day school established in Baltimore in 1917 taught secular subjects.

None of which led to the dayschool movement. Of the three, Eitz Chaim
even conformed to the started by Levatikim stereotype I gave, if just
too early for what we're discussing.

Eitz Chaim did evolve into something, but YU and RIETS aren't day
schools. MTA and BTA start later. R' Matlin started Eitz Chaim as a
post-PS program in his apartment. I don't know when secular studied
began, but initially, it didn't have to.

In any case, the schools we all attended are a product of a later
trend. When R "Mr" Schraga Feivel Mendelovitch had limudei chol instituted
in Torah vaDaas, do you think the "vaDaas" was his idea of lekhat-chilah?

....
:> So the problem is "frumkeit" rather than ehrlachkeit, not a lack of
:> secular studies.

: The strength of an Orthodox community is measured by how its member
: behave, i.e. to want extent they live by true Torah values..

But you haven't shown a connection between the lack of limudei chol
and the extent by which people are not living according to some
derekh's understanding of "true Torah values".

:> Speaking of which... what would R' Avigdor Miller have thought of
:> secular studies if the government wasn't forcing it on our teens?

: I knew him well for over 30 years. He spent much time speaking about how
: science can make us aware of the wonders of HaShem. ...

And yet would have felt a student who studied science as a full time
endevor to be a cause fo a cheshbon hanefesh.

And consequently, due to his own lack of formal study, much of the science
he uses in his examples is just plain wrong. (And similarly, someone
who knew the then-latest theories of cosmogony, geology and evolution
would not have found is arguments for Creationism very convincing. If
you don't know what the other side of the debate believes, you end up
knocking down strawmen.)

: how bodily functions worked. He himself knew how to write well. It is
: true that he had little use for literature, philosophy, etc. However,
: he did value mathematics.

Leshitakha-- Why aren't you asking how R' Miller could ignore RSRH's
paean to Schiller?

:> But there too, I think the main cause is frumkeit. And a misunderstanding
:> of what someone else or their institution (bank, gov't) not being of the
:> am hanivchar means.

: What is frumkeit? Can one define it? Frumkeit tends to focus on
: externalities, whereas Ehrlichkeit is something internal...

Frumkeit is about ritual and a drive to satisfy one's need to be holy.
Ehlichkeit is about wanting to do G-d's Will.

A frum "baal chessed" wants his gemach to be the biggest in town. An
ehrlicher one is happy those in his town in need have so many sources
of help.

See Alei Shur vol II pp 152-155 <http://www.aishdas.org/as/frumkeit.pdf>
A translation of an excetp by R' Ezra Goldschmiedt
<http://www.aishdas.org/mussar/aleishur/frumkeit>
My blog post on the topic <http://www.aishdas.org/asp/what-is-frumkeit>.

And if that's not your definition, it's the one I intended when I said
that the main cause of the chilulei hasheim you raised (and the mindset
that least to them which is in-and-of-itself un-Jewish) is frumeit.

:> I've been in academia, but not nearly as long as you, Prof Levine,
:> have. I'm sure your experience would agree that secular knowledge does
:> not produce people less prone to these things.

: I never meant to imply that having secular knowledge imparts morality to
: those who possess it...

So then why bring up immoral behavior as proof that there are problems
with a lack of secular education?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 18th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        2 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Netzach sheb'Tifferes: What is imposing about
Fax: (270) 514-1507                             balance?

> RAM:
>> On Erev Pesach morning, why is it that we are allowed to eat
>> before Biur Chametz?
> 

Burning hametz is a b?dieved.  In an ideal world we would eat all of our hametz
before zman issuro.  So Hazal gave us time to eat hametz in the morning, and instituted
biur hametz soon enough before noon that we wouldn?t violate any issurim, but not much
before that.  Otherwise why not do the biur right after bedika?

David Riceman

At 04:05 PM 4/18/2018, Micha Berger wrote:

None of which led to the day school movement. Of the three, Eitz Chaim
even conformed to the started by Levatikim stereotype I gave, if just
too early for what we're discussing.

Etz Cahim had secular studies in the late 1880s.  see below.

Eitz Chaim did evolve into something, but YU and RIETS aren't day
schools. MTA and BTA start later

Rabbi Dr. Bernard Revel started a high school 
with secular studies around 1915.

. R' Matlin started Eitz Chaim as a
post-PS program in his apartment. I don't know when secular studied
began, but initially, it didn't have to.

In any case, the schools we all attended are a product of a later
trend. When R "Mr" Schraga Feivel Mendelovitch had limudei chol instituted
in Torah vaDaas, do you think the "vaDaas" was his idea of lekhat-chilah?

This is not true.


> From my article

"<http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/jp/The%20Founding%20Of%20Yeshiva%20Etz%20Chaim.pdf>The 
Founding of Yeshiva Etz Chaim" The Jewish Press, May 2, 2008, pages 48 - 49.


 From the amount of time allocated to secular 
subjects, it is clear that the directors of the 
yeshiva considered these far less important than 
the students? limudei kodesh studies. Abraham 
Cahan, who would eventually become the editor of 
the Jewish Daily Forward and a prominent figure 
in the Socialist movement in America, became one 
of the first teachers in the English department in 1887.


             Cahan records that the curriculum 
was loosely drawn to provide for the study of 
grammar, arithmetic, reading, and spelling ? all 
within the ?English Department.? But because the 
directors of the school had no clear idea of what 
should be taught, the English Department 
functioned haphazardly, more out of a perfunctory 
acknowledgement for these subjects than a sincere 
desire to ?provide the children with a modern education.?

             The English Department was divided 
into two classes. The first was taught by a boy 
about fourteen, who had just graduated from 
public school and the second was taught by Cahan, 
who was a little less than twenty-eight years 
old. The students ranged from the ages of nine or 
ten to fifteen and many were exposed to the 
formal study of secular subjects for the first 
time. One of the native students received his 
first lessons in the English language when he 
entered the Yeshiva after passing his thirteenth birthday.

   The young immigrants presented an immense 
challenge to their devoted teachers. The students 
drank up the instruction with a thirst centuries 
old. Cahan frequently remained long after the 
prescribed teaching hours to tutor his pupils, 
who were uniformly poor in reading and 
mathematics and who regarded grammar as an 
exquisite form of torture. On these occasions, 
the directors would ask Cahan why he ?worked so 
hard,? saying that the students ?already knew enough English.?

And from my article 
"<http://www.jewishpress.com/sections/magazine/glimpses-ajh/the-founding-of-the-rabbi-jacob-joseph-school/2008/09/03/>The 
Founding of the Rabbi Jacob Joseph School"  The 
Jewish Press, September 5, 2008, pages 26 & 66.

Setting The Pattern For Future Yeshivas

The Rabbi Jacob Joseph School was unique in that 
it was the first elementary parochial school that 
taught basic Jewish studies as well as Talmud. 
Yeshiva Etz Chaim, founded in 1886, was an 
intermediate school that enrolled boys at least 
nine years old who already were somewhat 
proficient in Chumash and Rashi. Yeshiva Etz 
Chaim?s goal was to give its students a thorough 
grounding in Gemara and Shulchan Aruch. In 
addition, it provided some limited secular studies in the late afternoon.
The Rabbi Jacob Joseph School was different in 
that in addition to providing a first rate 
religious education, it sought to provide its 
students with an excellent secular education at 
least equivalent to that offered by the public schools of the time.
Nonetheless, limudei chol (secular or ?English? 
studies) was considered much less important than 
limudei kodesh (religious studies), and this 
attitude was clearly displayed in the 
constitution of the school. It required that 
there be two principals, one for each department.

YL

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20180418/85c16026/attachment-0001.html>

R? Jay F, Shachter wrote:
?We need to have a secular education in order to come to a correct
judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us.

Two examples will suffice.  Rambam in his commentary to `Eruvin 1:5
says that pi is irrational (I am not able to read his commentary in
the original Arabic, I am saying this based on my reading of a Hebrew
translation).  This is the Mishna that says that pi is 3.  Rambam
defends the Mishna by saying that pi is of course, not 3, but any
value we give would have to be an approximation, because pi is
irrational (he does not use that word, or more precisely the Hebrew
translator does not, but from his circumlocutions that is clearly what
he means), so the only question is how accurate an approximation we
need, and 3 is good enough for the halakha, since the exact value
cannot be calculated anyway.

A reader without a secular education would think that Rambam knew what
he was talking about.  He did not; he was guessing (as it happens,
correctly).  Rambam did not know that pi was irrational.  The
irrationality of pi was not proved until 1761, and the proof (and all
subsequent proofs) required mathematics that Rambam did not have.?

To this I respond:
First, I certainly would not wish to set myself up as one who is capable
?to come to a correct judgement about the credibility of the sages who
preceded us,? despite having some modern math and scientific knowledge. I
think such a broad statement goes much too far. 

Not having any significant knowledge of Greek, I will refrain from
commenting on your second example. However the first example you cite
regarding Pi and the Rambam is one that I am willing to challenge. You are
of course correct about the dating of the formal proof[s] (there are more
than one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_that_%CF%80_is_irrational),
date to modern, post Rambam times. However, it is very possible and
probably likely that the Rambam intuited this on his own, even if without
the benefit of a formal proof, that Pi had to be or was most likely to be
irrational. I know I did so and probably most reasonably good students of
math do so as well, long before they are aware of any formal proof for that
fact. One reason for this is the well known method to approximate the value
of Pi to any precision desired (even if very slow to converge) that
requires little more than the knowledge of how to analyze a triangle.
Simply inscribe a polygon of N equal isosceles tria
 ngles in
  a circle and calculate its perimeter and then divide by twice the length
  of the long side (= diameter of the circle). then do the same for N+1,
  and N+2 etc. a process in theory you could do infinitely many times for
  greater precision. So to intuit irrationality is very plausible even if
  not proven in our modern sense. Practically, note, that no matter how far
  you carry this exercise you will not get a repeating decimal that is the
  mark of the rational number.
So I think you are far from ?judging the credibility? of the Rambam based on this example you cited.

Kol tuv
Chaim Manaster






---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20180418/9f6beee6/attachment-0001.html>

.
R' Ben Waxman wrote:

> I asked around with several rabbanim and they told that "Truth
> of the matter is, once you sell your chameitz there is no real
> need to do a bedika. Anything in your house, whether you know
> about or not, is owned by the non-Jew."
>
> The question that came up for me later was "OK, so we do a bedika
> anyway because that is the custom. But why say a bracha?".

I suspect that you misunderstood those rabbanim, and what they meant
was that once you sell your chameitz there is no *d'Oraisa* need to do
a bedika. We do the bedika anyway because it is a Chiyuv D'Rabanan,
and that's why we say the bracha.

This is actually a very old question, usually phrased as: "If I do
Bitul, why do I need a Bedika also?" I concede that the *main* answer
to this is that the Bitul might not be sincere, but that is not the
only reason.

Mishneh Brurah 431:2 writes: "Also: Because people are used to chometz
all year long, if there is still some in his house and his possession,
they made a gezera because he might forget and eat it."

Some may question what I am writing in this post, and they will point
out that Mechira is more effective than Bedika, because (as RBW wrote)
Mechira gets rid of ALL the chometz, whereas Bedika only gets rid of
the chometz that we found. But this is an error, in my opinion,
because the concern raised by the MB was that one might happen to come
across some chometz, and thoughtlessly eat it. Mechira will NOT
prevent this. Mechira will ONLY remove the chometz from one's
ownership, but it will not help against forgetfullness.

I would like to close by showing that Bedikah and Mechira BOTH have
strengths that the other lacks, and that is why people should do both:
Mechira removes all chometz from ownership, regardless of where it
might be, and (I think) regardless of my sincerity, but if I didn't
clean the house well enough I may have left some around. Bedika
removes (or greatly reduces) the chance that I might come across some
chometz accidentally, but the chometz that I didn't find is still in
my ownership.

A better question to ask, I think, might be: If I have sold my
chometz, why do I also need the BITUL? After all, the Mechira already
removed ALL chometz from my possession, and there's nothing left for
me to nullify! (Hmmmm... I wonder if that might be what RBW had
intended to type!)

Akiva Miller

To put it in plain language, the very concept that one must have a 
rigorous mathematical proof for a proposition before one can state it as 
a fact didn't exist in the Rambam's day.  In his day it was considered 
acceptable to say "Look, pi is obviously an irrational number", and 
nobody would lift an eyebrow, because it *is* obvious.  Only later did 
mathematicians start to say, well, yes, it is obvious, but let's see if 
we can actually prove it.  And eventually they did so, and guess what, 
they confirmed what everyone including the Rambam already knew.

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

You need to do a bedika even if you do bitul, not a mechira. AFAIK there 
is no issur in having a goy's chameitz sitting in your property.
Ben

On 4/19/2018 12:33 AM, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote:
> I suspect that you misunderstood those rabbanim, and what they meant
> was that once you sell your chameitz there is no*d'Oraisa*  need to do
> a bedika. We do the bedika anyway because it is a Chiyuv D'Rabanan,
> and that's why we say the bracha.
>
> This is actually a very old question, usually phrased as: "If I do
> Bitul, why do I need a Bedika also?"

On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 03:09:29AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote:
: To put it in plain language, the very concept that one must have a
: rigorous mathematical proof for a proposition before one can state
: it as a fact didn't exist in the Rambam's day...

I fully agree. But there is an irony here.

When it comes to theolgy, the Rambam holds the chiyuv is to know, ie to
believe because they had proof -- not tradition, not pur faith, etc...

I think the Rambam believed he had a proof that pi was irrational.
However, he had a differnt definition of the word proof.

Continuing on this tangent... I think the definition of "proof" and
therefore of "Rationalism" changed so much since the Rambam's day,
the Rambam really wouldn't qualify as a "Rationalist" in our sense of
the word.

For example, science wasn't invented yet. The things the Rambam believed
about Natural Philosophy were not backed by anything comparable to the
rigor of scientific process.

(Which itself is only rigorous at narrowing down the search space.
Actual theories are constructed inductively, patterns found from a
number of examples, and only have Bayesian levels of certainty. There can
always be a black swan out there that, once found, requires replacing the
theory with a new one. But *disproving* theories? That black swan does
with certainty. Jumping back to before this parenthetic digression...)

Similarly in math. The Rambam didn't have a modern mathemetician's
definition of proof in mind. Even though he knew Euclid. But he
did and always expected knowledge to be backed by some kind of proof.

Archimedes spent a lot of time trying to "square the circle", i.e.
come up with a geometric way of constructing a square with the same
area as a circle. Numerous people tried since. This is the same
thing as failing to find the rational number that is pi.

Say the square they were looking for had sides of length s. So, the are
of the square would be s^2. To "square the circle" would mean to find a
square whose sides, s, are such that the ratio between s^2 and r^2 is pi,
so that the areas s^2 (the square) and pi * r^2 (the circle) are equal.

Repeatedly failing to find s by geometric construction eventually led
people to conclude it was a fool's errand. By the Rambam's day, it was
taken as a given that geometric construction could not find an s,
and therefore that the ratio between them, pi, was irrational.

(Weirdly, there still could have been a "black swan", the geometric
construction that hadn't yet been found. The level of confidence the
Rambam had would parellel that of a scientist believing the results of
repeated experiment, but not that of a modern methematician.)

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 19th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote
Fax: (270) 514-1507                         withdrawal and submission?

At 04:05 PM 4/18/2018, Micha Berger wrote:
>Eitz Chaim did evolve into something, but YU and RIETS aren't day
>schools. MTA and BTA start later. R' Matlin started Eitz Chaim as a
>post-PS program in his apartment. I don't know when secular studied
>began, but initially, it didn't have to.

I would like to continue to correct what you wrote in an earlier post.

 From https://goo.gl/e4pm3b

"Revel consistently maintained that secular knowledge in Judaism was 
never separate from the study of Torah. He emphasized the importance 
of unifying Judaism and secular studies. Often speaking of the, 
"harmonious union of culture and spirituality," he believed that 
knowledge of the liberal arts would broaden one's understanding of 
Torah. However, Revel's dedication to Orthodox Jewry was undisputed. 
For instance, he forbade the use of a female vocalist in the 1926 
Music Festival, as a female singer is a violation of Orthodox Jewish 
law. He did not allow Reform Jews to serve on Yeshiva College's 
national board of directors. He was also staunchly opposed to mixed 
seating in synagogues.

"He wrote: 'Yeshiva aims at unity, at the creation of a synthesis 
between the Jewish conception of life, our spiritual and moral 
teaching and ideals, and the present-day humanities, the scientific 
conscience and spirit to help develop the complete harmonious Jewish 
personality, once again to enrich and bless our lives, to revitalize 
the true spirit and genius of historic Judaism.'"

 From https://goo.gl/hbRw8S

"Rabbi Revel's first step as the new head of RIETS was the creation 
of an affi liated high school. The high school, Talmudical Academy, 
had its fi rst entering class in September 1916."

Regarding Rabbi Moshe Meir Matlin please see

"<http://www.jewishpress.com/sections/magazine/glimpses-ajh/rabbi-moshe-meir-matlin-torah-education-pioneer/2008/04/02/>Rabbi 
Moshe Meir Matlin, Torah Education Pioneer in America" The Jewish 
Press, April 4, 2008, pages 42 & 91.

YL

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20180419/fcb52101/attachment-0001.html>

On 19/04/18 02:13, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote:
> You need to do a bedika even if you do bitul, not a mechira. AFAIK there 
> is no issur in having a goy's chameitz sitting in your property.

Nor is there an issur in having hefker chametz sitting in your property, 
but you have to search for it and put it away or get rid of it, for fear 
that if you come across it during Pesach you may absentmindedly eat it.

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

.
I  just realized another complication. After the rav sells my chometz, then
I don't own any chometz any more, and as RBW wrote, there is no longer any
need to say Bitul (on a d'Oraisa level).

But wait! There's more! It seems that at this point in the morning, I MUST
NOT burn the chometz that I have saved for the Biur, because it is no
longer mine to burn. It belongs to the non-Jew, and I must not destroy it
without his permission. Does the Shtar Mechira include this permission?

Akiva Miller
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20180419/af50d328/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.)