Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 088

Monday, November 1 1999

< Previous Next >
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 23:08:27 -0500
From: Sholem Berger <bergez01@med.nyu.edu>
They don't want to convert us: halevay

>> [They are anti-Semites and their] goal is to convert the Jewish
>> people to the worship of 
>> Jesus.

>This simply isn't true.  Of course, Christians believe
>we should convert.  But mainstream Fundamentalist
>Christians now realize they aren't going to be able to
>and it has become socially unaceptable to try and do

As a universalist I would love to believe that, as a liberal I'm skeptical, and as a Jew
raised in Kentucky I know for a fact this is false. Ask the Southern Baptist convention whether
they consider attempts at conversion "socially unacceptable" and let me know
if you come away without an armload of pamphlets...


Go to top.

Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 22:30:33 -0600
From: Saul Weinreb <sweinr1@uic.edu>
Orthodox acitivists

Reb HM writes, "This simply isn't true.  Of course, Christians believe
we should convert.  But mainstream Fundamentalist
Christians now realize they aren't going to be able to
and it has become socially unaceptable to try and do
Reb Harry, I think you are very dangerously mistaken.  Deep down in the
hearts of every Christian Missionary is the very fundamental belief that it
is their mission to convert the world to their religion.  When they agree
with you on any issue, deep down they are hoping that you will see the
similarities between them and us...we have so much in common...what is the
real difference...what do they believe anyway...maybe there is some truth
to Mr. J...at least what could be so bad about believing...etc... Rachmana
Litzlan.  One of the most intellegent members of my class at the University
of Illinois Medical School is a devout Christian.  He is a wonderful
person, and he seems to stear so many of our conversations to the "moral
issues" that bind us.  He gives the most passionate defence of some of the
issues that we agree upon so strongly, especially those that impact the
Frum Jew directly.  He delivers the best arguments for school vouchers,
U.S. support of the State of Israel, legislation for the protection of
religious freedon etc...he and I were on the "same team" during student
lounge lunchtime discussions for more than two years and we had deeveloped
a decent friendship.  But then he tried to get me to read some J for J
literature, just to "evaluate" it - no - no - not to "convince" me - just
that he wanted me to explain to him all of this "Maimonides" stuff and how
rachmono litzlan (May the Rambam forgive me for even hearing such terrible
words) the Rambam would have Chas Veshalom been a member of that movement
of mechalelei shem shamayim.  The true colors of the missionary wil always
show themselves.  Needles to say, although I am still friendly with him, I
avoid almost all serious discussion about anything.
I simply don't believe you, and I completely disagree with your statement.
A mainstream fundamentalist Christian must believe that everyone can be
converted, they cannot relinquish this belief, or their entire belief
system will fail.
Shaul Weinreb

Go to top.

Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 22:36:28 -0600
From: "Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer" <sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>
Lower Salaries for Women and Ono'oh

R' Avrohom Allswang asked about my position that lower salaries for women
performing work comparable to that of a man who is paid more for the same
job falls into the category of Ona'as Devorim. I do not understand why this
is difficult. If you look at the parameters of ths prohibition as described
in the Chinuch mitzva 338, the Yere'im no. 51 (in some editions no. 180) and
in the Shulchan Aruch CM 228 you will see that it is a more severe
prohibition than Ona'as Mammon and that it consists, essentially, of causing
unwarranted anguish to any Jew - man, woman, even child. It seesm elementary
to me that great anguish results (not just for the women, also their
dependents) who are paid less than men for comparable work. I did not see in
any of sources that Ona'as Devorim is permitted b'makom hefsed merubeh.
Thus, the conclusion is that any oppressive shortchange in wages constitutes
Ona'as Devorim.

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

Go to top.

Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 00:05:33 -0500
From: Gershon Dubin <gershon.dubin@juno.com>
equal time

From: Russell J Hendel <rjhendel@juno.com>
> Subject: RE: Discussing Multiple Viewpoints

> So...if Agudah wants to promote its view...then it is obligated to
> explain clearly and lucidly all the other views and then state why
> its view is preferred.

	I am not sure whether you are stating that anyone who wishes to state an
opinion,  be they private individual or organization,  is obligated to
state all other viewpoints as well.  

	If this is an obligation you have not proved it.  Rebbi certainly
brought the opposing opinions.  However,  no other tannaim or amoraim
did, with the exception of Bais Hillel.  BH is lauded for mentioning the
views of Beis Shammai;  it does not appear in that Mishna to criticize
everyone else who does not,  beginning with, well, Beis Shammai.

	If it is advice that you offer,  that mentioning opposing views will
likely help the promulgation of your own,  the Agudah,  the OU and any
other organization who does not publicize opposing views (do ANY?) are at
liberty to ignore your kind advice.


Go to top.

Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 00:23:21 -0500
From: Gershon Dubin <gershon.dubin@juno.com>
Yoatzos, once again

> From: Russell J Hendel <rjhendel@juno.com	>
> Subject: One More Thought on The Yoatzoth

> ======================================
> On Shabbath Chana

	Pardon my ignorance:  what is Shabos Chana?


> In a similar vein a few years ago I met a woman who went to Rav
> Moshe and requested a divorce after 6 weeks of marriage (to one
> of his talmidim). When Rav Moshe told her to "try it out a bit more"
> she fainted on the spot. 
> Again I think YOATZOTH could vastly help in situations like this
> My point is you need not only SOCIAL skills you need HALACHIC
> skills also

	Pardon me once again,  but which one of these was Rav Moshe lacking?

> Sadya here is my point--The following two cases are the same
> Case 1: A women is cooking chicken soup. A cold dairy spoon 
> (that has not been used in 24 hours) falls in and is immediately 
> taken out(I am assuming the whole soup remains kosher). The
> women is trusted to serve this soup as Kosher WITHOUT
> telling her husband what had happened. Furthermore I think
> most Poskim would agree that if she had been already advised
> that the soup is Kosher the last time the spoon feel in she should
> not feel obligated to ASK A SHEEILAH. In other words she is
> trusted.
> Case 2: Same soup. Same spoon. Same falling in. Except that
> this women asks her neighbor if it is Kosher and her neighbor
> tells her "that has happened to me several times and it is
>  Kosher".

	In response to RRH's scenarios,  I would like to quote from none other
than..........Reb Russell himself in another post,  same digest:

> Unless you are trained in how to make distinctions, how to resolve
> conflicting opiinions, how to see exceptions to iron clad rules 
> (part
> of the process of Talmud Torah

	Anyone with more than a glancing familiarity with Isur veHeter knows
that small changes change the halacha.  Witness RRH's scenario wherein an
eino ben yomo figures prominently.  One could also imagine things like
nosein taam lifgam,  dvorim sheyesh lahem matirin,  beriya,  davar
charif,  etc.  I don't think many of us on this list need elaboration.

	I for one would be horrified if my wife were to decide a shaila of this
ilk on her own based on a previous psak which appeared similar.   Being
medameh milsa lemilsa,  and the opposite,  making chilukim between cases,
 is the essence of horo'ah and should not (with few exceptions) be left
to the woman or (no exceptions) her neighbor. 

	This is not to demean the level of women's learning;  the same would
apply to anyone,  man or woman,  who did not have the requisite training;
 I would be just as horrified if one of my sons were to presume to be
medameh milsa lemilsa without having become familiar with the halachos


Go to top.

Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 00:30:08 -0500
From: Gershon Dubin <gershon.dubin@juno.com>

> 4.  HM wants more info on R' Aaron Twerski's proposals regarding 
> limiting
> simchos.
> have my copies, and would gladly lend them to anyone who might be 
> interested.
	Is it possible to post them?


Go to top.

Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 00:19:38 -0500 (EST)
From: "Jonathan J. Baker" <jjbaker@panix.com>
Lubavitcher Rebbe ztvkll"h and college

Mrs. G. Atwood wrote: 
> Does anyone know the Lubavich position on college studies, given that the
> late Lubavicher Rebbe Zatzal, learned engineering at Berlin and the
> Sorbonne, - was he not already the son-in-law of the Friediche Rebbe at that
> time?

I can answer this one, based on Shimon Deutsch's bio of the Rebbe.

1) He went to college at Berlin *against* the wishes of the Previous Rebbe.

2) He married Rebbetzin Chaya Mushka while in Berlin.  They had been
engaged since 1924, the marriage was in 1928.

From Yitzchok Zirkind: 
> As a GENERAL rule, the Rebbe was against going to college.

3) In the 1950s, the Rebbe wrote an article saying, essentially, that
while he had the intestinal fortitude to withstand the blandishments of
secular college, he did not generally recommend it for others.

Go to top.

Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 09:30:40 +0200 ("IST)
From: Eli Turkel <turkel@math.tau.ac.il>
limudei chol

> >
> I suspect that R' Feldman (I assume, from context, that you refer to R'
> Aharon Feldman, not his brother, the editor of  Tradition) would not be
> pleased with the way you characterized his position.
> He probably meant to reject RAYK and RYBS's positions on certain issues
> only.
> This is probably not one of them. This is just a hunch. Since he is your
> nephew's shverr, could you please enquire further?
> L'gufo shel inyan, I think there is a common error with regard to the
> attitude of many Gedolei Torah toward Limudei Chol. Their opposition is
> generally not to the acquisition of knowledge of secular studies, but rather
> to the schooling therein. As we know, many Gedolei Torah who never set foot
> in an institution of secular study were far greater beki'im in those areas
> than others with quite advanced degrees. They were not against individuals
> becoming autodidacts (I believe that is the correct word). For many reasons,
> which one may or may not find oneself in agreement with, however, they were
> against formal education and schooling therein.

Yes I know and respect R. Aharon Feldman but still do not agree with his positions.
In fact his letter to the editor to Tradition was a response to a letter of mine.
His letter was in regard to religious zionism and not secular studies but I
see no reason to distinguish between them.  To be fair I quote his words

"Turkel's statement that religious Zionism does obey the edicts of gedolei
Yisrael - those who 'have a positive attitude towards the secular state'-
begs the question. We cannot choose our leaders by having them fit a
preconceived ideology. Granted that the exalted personages whom Turkel cites
are gedolei Torah can we disqualify other no less exalted personages such as
Hafetz Haim, Hazon Ish, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, Rav Elyashiv and Rav Kanefsky
because their ideology is 'wrong'? Can we deny that the predominant majority of
recognized world-class gedolei Yisrael of previous and present generations
believe that we should not identify with secular Zionsim? "

I could repalce religious zionism by study secular studies (okay in a college)
without changing anything else (except perhaps some of the names).

In any case I strongly disagree with the above statement. Tradition does not allow
one to respond to an answer to a letter to the editor or else I would have written
in print.

First of all, people choose their leaders all the time from Bet Hillel/bet Shamai
to litvak/hassidic. There is no such concept in Halakha as majority rules in terms
of poskim in an era - only in a sanhedrin. We have no way of numbering gedolim
and weighing one against the other and so numbers dont count, eg the decision
between Bet Hillel and Bet Shamai.
I have never heard that one is not allowed to choose some charismatic Admor as
his personel rebbe because "we cannot choose our leaders".
R. Lichtenstein in article on secular studies strongly relies on Rav Soloveitchik
and other gedolim and clearly rejects R. A. Feldman's argument that a majority wins.

In terms of secular studies, many gedolim opposed it outright no matter what the
context. Others opposed going to a college but not learning secular studies
in a college. Since almost everyone on this list did learn in a college and
certainly in a high school maybe we should just shut down this list as being
against daat Torah.

Eli Turkel

Go to top.

Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 09:36:28 +0200 ("IST)
From: Eli Turkel <turkel@math.tau.ac.il>
learning secular studies

HM writes

> But you would never know this from the pronouncments
> of R.Shach. If I remember correctly, R Shach Assur'd
> secular education on a wholesale basis.  Therefore
> there is none for boys attending Charedi Highschools.
> There is absolutely no way that any of these students
> have a chance of knowing any of the physical sciences,
> or any other discipline that could help them lead more
> productive lives in the future.
I would add to this that even on the level of learning and
psak there is a major problem because many gedolim (not all!!)
have no concept of what modern science and medicine is about.
Sternberg in his article in BDD gives many examples of psak
of important poskim that shows a complete lack of knowledge of
the modern world.

Eli Turkel

Go to top.

Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 11:33 +0200
From: BACKON@vms.huji.ac.il
Re: Limudei Chol

I can't understand why in certain frum communities there is an antagonism
to the advanced study of math and science: without a minimal background
in these areas, one is unable to understand many aspects of gemara (the
mathematical basis of *issureita d'bei rabi* comes into mind as well as
the recent daf yomi in Rosh Hashana [if I hadn't purchased an English
language version of Kuntres Di Shemaya which explains for the educated
layman concepts like: sidereal, ecliptic, nodes, arcs, refraction, perigee,
apogee, anomalistic, eliptic orbit, I would NEVER have comprehended what
was going on].

Studying science was encouraged by the GRA (see the *mavo* to the Pe'at
Hashulchan). Those who encouraged study of science include: Yearot Dvash II 7;
Tshuvot haREMA 7; Sheelat Yaavetz I:41; both Rabbenu Bachya and Tosfot Yom
Tov on Pirkei Avot 3:18; Meharsha on Horayot 10a; Biur HaGRA Yoreh Deah 201
s"k vav; Malbushei Yom Tov ORACH CHAIM 294).


Go to top.

Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 11:50:56 +0200
From: "Shoshana L. Boublil" <toramada@netvision.net.il>
Re: Avodah V4 #85

>Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 15:41:47 -0600
>From: "Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer"
>Subject: Re: Limudei Chol
>If they studied Tolstoy they would still remain unemployed.
>Ditto if they studied trigonometry or physics.
>(BTW, I sincerely regret every single moment I spent studying trig in HS.
>B"H I was never required to take physics. A major waste of time. Tolstoy
>would have been a lot more useful!)
>Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
>Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL 60659
>http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila    ygb@aishdas.org

My daughter recently found her trig. studies very useful when she was
designing her own dresses without a pre-made pattern.

Chemistry has been very useful in the area of housecleaning: mixing cleaning
agents and knowing how to take out stains.

Physics (esp. quantum mechanics) has been useful in understanding some
chapters in Nevi'im and sections in Tehilim.  We had many hours of Torah
related discussions with our physics and chemistry professors, and it was
always related to the scientific topic we were studying.

That's besides my parnassa which is in the
physics/chemistry/computer/enviro. fields <g>.

It's just that like in lots of other matters, we can't know in advance who
will never need a specific knowledge and who will - so people should have a
basic knowledge.


Go to top.

Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 12:13 +0200
From: BACKON@vms.huji.ac.il
Re: Conspicuous consumption

Apart from the ban on instrumental music (the Iggrot Moshe Orach Chaim I:166
suggests that the *baal nefesh* stay away from such affairs) there is
the halacha in Orach Chaim 560:1 how we are to treat our homes (leave an
unpainted wall, etc.) as *zecher l'churban* and this is discussed in the
Mishna Brura in detail.

I don't think million dollar mansions and opulent homes coincides with
following this halacha.


Go to top.

Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 05:40:18 EST
From: Joelirich@aol.com
Re: Avodah V4 #85

In a message dated 11/1/99 4:55:08 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
toramada@netvision.net.il writes:

 That's besides my parnassa which is in the
 physics/chemistry/computer/enviro. fields <g>.
 It's just that like in lots of other matters, we can't know in advance who
 will never need a specific knowledge and who will - so people should have a
 basic knowledge.
It's the old 80/20 rule - 80% of what you learn in school you'll never need - 
the problem is you never know in advance  which 20% you'll need.  BTW the 
Rav(YBS) saw parallels in physics and philosophy.

Kol Tuv,
Joel RIch

Go to top.

Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 12:43:07 +0200
From: "Carl M. Sherer" <csherer@netvision.net.il>
Re: DO vs DON"T

On 31 Oct 99, at 16:06, Russell J Hendel wrote:

> But now I ask..."Why do we differ"---that is, what have
> you seenin positive commandments that people should
> do it for their own sake while in negative commandmens
> you agree that they avoid sin for fear of social reprisal?

If I see someone walking in the street on the morning of the first 
day of Succos, and he does not have a lulav v'esrog with him, I can 
(and should) be dan him lechaf zchus to say that he already 
bentched, will bentch later, had to put it down somewhere, etc., 
etc. But if I see someone walking in the streets arm in arm with 
someone else's wife, how can I be dan him lechaf zchus? She's his 
sister? Suppose she's not! 

I think the distinction is that when one is not doing a positive 
mitzva there is always an explanation for why one is not doing it, 
and therefore there is less social pressure to do positive mitzvos 
(not to mention that my neighbors have no way of knowing if I 
bought a $10 esrog or a $100 esrog unless they are mumchim). So 
when I do a positive mitzva, I am largely self motivated. Sure there 
are exceptions. I'm sure all of us have had the experience of giving 
money to a schnorrer whom we might not have given to had 
someone else not been standing there at the time. But those are 
the exceptions, not the general rule.

But if I am doing an aveira, assuming I am a member in good 
standing of the fruhm kehilla, there is always some fear of being 
caught, and it's that fear of being caught that can keep me in line. 
What if someone happens by that McDonald's (outside of Israel 
although some of them here are not Kosher either) and sees that I 
went in there for more than a Coke? What if someone walks down 
the street and sees me with my arm around that woman who is not 
my wife? What if someone comes by and sees me pick up that 
dollar in the street on Shabbos? THAT'S the kind of social pressure 
that makes one not do aveiros. And that social pressure that 
doesn't exist with respect to positive mitzvos.

The Gemara in Moed Katan 17 says that if one wishes to do an 
aveira he should go to a city where no one knows him and dress in 
black so that at least he is not mechalel Hashem. The rishonim 
there comment that by having to go to another city and dress in 
black, the person will be prevented from doing the aveira, because 
he will be ashamed of himself. That shame comes from social 

-- Carl

Carl M. Sherer, Adv.
Silber, Schottenfels, Gerber & Sherer
Telephone 972-2-625-7751
Fax 972-2-625-0461

Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for my son,
Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.
Thank you very much.

Go to top.

Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 12:43:07 +0200
From: "Carl M. Sherer" <csherer@netvision.net.il>
Re: luxuries

On 31 Oct 99, at 16:02, Alan Davidson wrote:

 Or witness the recent article in Yated from a gemach 
> manager talking about how deeply most newlyweds get into debt before they 
> can even think about how they are going to pay for day school tuitions and 
> the like -- 

Actually, I'm more concerned about their parents who incur 
tremendous debts to marry their kids off and after marrying off a 
child or two find themselves in abject poverty with a houseful of 
children to go.

While we do not generally have the conspicuously lavish weddings 
of the type that have been described here in the last two days, I 
think most fruhm Jews are aware that in many circles in Israel 
parents are expected to buy an apartment for their children; and in 
the case of a bride's parents, the parents are often expected to buy 
it alone. I still recall one of my wealthy friends here being horrified 
at hearing his son's Rosh Yeshiva tell a boy that he should only 
marry a girl who can provide TWO apartments; one to live in and 
one to rent for income. 

When the Gerrer Rebbe told his chassidim to donate as much to 
tzedaka as they spent on a wedding, he was speaking mainly to 
those in EY. I could tell you stories of poverty that would make 
many of you cringe. Just in my own neighborhood, I know of 
several families who literally cannot put food on the table. And 
when a family like that has to spend $40,000 (that's considered the 
going rate these days) to marry off a child or suddenly has 
unexpected medical expenses, they can find themselves deeply in 
debt for life.

Two years ago on Tisha b'Av, someone got up in shul and made an 
appeal for the family of a yungerman who was niftar the week 
before. We hear these appeals all the time, and it's easy to 
become immune to them. This one was unusual even by 
Yerushalmi standards. The person making the appeal told us that 
the family had two children sleeping in the bathtub every night, and 
that at the levaya, the wife debated wearing her housecoat or her 
one and only dress because whatever she wore would have to be 
used for tearing kriya. 

I don't know who is making these types of lavish weddings, but as 
far as I am concerned, if these people would take a portion of what 
they spend on the wedding and donate it to those who have less, I 
wouldn't begrudge them the opportunity to give their friends a good 
time. But the amount of money that gets wasted at weddings in the 
US is truly apalling. I haven't seen a smorgasboard worthy of the 
name since I came on aliya, and I hope that at least here, the 
money is better spent.

I understand that Yated is full of appeals for poor families here. I 
don't see those appeals (I don't usually have the time to read 
papers, and when I do I stick to lighter things), but I can tell you 
that chances are that every one of those appeals is legitimate. I 
know some of them personally. So the next time you go to a $400 
a plate wedding, think that could be food for two Shabbosim for a 
family of ten whose kids all sleep on the floor. And then think of 
something better to do with the money.

-- Carl

Carl M. Sherer, Adv.
Silber, Schottenfels, Gerber & Sherer
Telephone 972-2-625-7751
Fax 972-2-625-0461

Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for my son,
Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.
Thank you very much.

Go to top.

Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 12:43:07 +0200
From: "Carl M. Sherer" <csherer@netvision.net.il>
Women Going to Shul on Shabbos (was Re: Shul centred Judaism)

On 31 Oct 99, at 22:57, Chana/Heather Luntz wrote:

> Ironically though, when i have tried to exercise that choice, I have run
> into a lot of resistance.  Truth is, I don't like going to any of the
> shuls around here, I am much happier on a shabbas morning sleeping in,
> davening at home, maybe learning a bit.
> But that choice is not seen as an acceptable one.  If we had children
> that would be one thing, but Robert gets all the time "where's Chana" on
> shabbas, and it makes him miserable.  And strangely enough, the decision
> itself upsets him a great deal.  Yes, he would prefer I came along to
> his Sephardi shul, but the fact that I might prefer an Ashkenazi service
> is something he can live with (although he has come up with a place her
> that has a Sephardi service in one room and an Ashkenazi service in
> another as the ideal solution).  So he was comfortable with me going to
> my local Ashkenazi shul for the yamim noraim, while he went to his
> usual.  What really upsets him (and i don't really understand why) is my
> not going at all. Everybody else seems to respond this way as well (as
> well as us getting a lot of flack for the separate shuls business, which
> I really don't understand.  I mean, the whole point of a mechitza is
> that you are not davening with your husband, so what difference does it
> make if you are meters away or kilometres - the shuls being in opposite
> directions to our house.  But I have had the most charedi people
> objecting emphatically to this course of action).  And he was so happy
> last shabbas when, because we were going really quite far for lunch, and
> the shul (the one with the Sephardi and Ashkenazi minyan) was a good
> portion of the way there, I turned up so as to meet them all there. 

If it makes you feel any better, I was the same way when we first 
got married with dragging Adina to shul (until she had our first child 
and there was no eruv in the neighborhood at the time), and I'll bet 
if you poll the guys on this list, you'll find that many others were (or 
are - depending on their stage of life) too. 

And I can't even tell you why. I had this inexplicable need (which I 
never had when I was single) to have someone else go to shul with 
me. Who knows, maybe it will happen again when the kids are all 
grown up and out of the house, and then I will be able to explain 

But it's perfectly normal (at least I hope it is:-), and the only way I 
think you're going to get around it is to live in a charedi 
neighborhood where many of the shuls don't have an ezras nashim 
for some or all of the minyanim.

-- Carl

Carl M. Sherer, Adv.
Silber, Schottenfels, Gerber & Sherer
Telephone 972-2-625-7751
Fax 972-2-625-0461

Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for my son,
Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.
Thank you very much.

Go to top.

Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 08:53:09 -0500 (EST)
From: micha@aishdas.org (Micha Berger)
It can happen here

Need I mention what this summer was like for Jews and for minorities in general
in America?

My grandfather, sheyichyeh, can tell you (if you give him even an iota of
opportunity <grin>) about all of our relatives in Germany and Litta, hy"d,
who told him in the 30s that "It can't happen here".

Today's newspaper carries a story in which the parents of the killers in
Colombine are addressed by the opposition's lawyer, urging them to rethink
their decision to be represented by Jews.

And this is before their precious millenium. Combine the millenium with the
next recession and the US has much negative potential. May we be zocheh not
to see that potential actualized.


Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for  1-Nov-99: Levi, Sara
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 62a
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         

Go to top.

Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 14:07:06 +0200
From: "Mrs. Gila Atwood" <gatwood@netvision.net.il>
Re: Avodah V4 #76- geshem

> > OK this is an avoda on a gashmi level but it's still Torah.
On reflection I see why I was taken aback by your response. "Gashmius" is
often used to refer to luxuries and comforts etc- but I'd quite forgotten
that sense of the word. I was using the word  "gashmi" in the simplest
Hebrew sense = "material".

A pun here (unintended at the time) since "geshem" means "rain"!
Respects-  Mrs. G.A.

Go to top.

Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 09:01:05 -0500 (EST)
From: micha@aishdas.org (Micha Berger)
Re: Limudei Chol

I see already four positions, although not clearly spelled out. If I may
take a moment to do so:

1- Limudei chol are treif;
2- L"C are a necessary evil for parnasah;
3- There is kedushah to earning a parnasah k'halachah, so L"C for a parnasah
   has kedushah as well;
4- L"C in general, not just what is needed to earn income, has kedushah as such
   knowledge is part of what it means to live biderech haTorah.
   4a vs. 4b would be whether (a) or not (b) we limit this idea to the

4a would probably be based around "mil'u es ha'aretz *vikivshuha*" and would
promote the study of science and technology. 4b, as articulated by R' Aharon
Soloveitchik, would ascribe positive value to the study of liberal arts. I
believe the S'ridei Eish (as I've cited on Avodah in the past) understood RSRH
to be in the 4b camp as well.


Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for  1-Nov-99: Levi, Sara
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 62a
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         

Go to top.


[ 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         ]

< Previous Next >