Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 404

Wednesday, March 1 2000

• kaddish and diyyukim
• Re: kaddish and diyyukim
• Re: Women as Guests
• Re: Mishna Berura reference
• Re: Learning Schedule
• RE: Avodah V4 #403
• Re: still more on diyyukim
• Learning Schedule
• Torah u Madda???
• Re: Learning Schedule
• Study of History
• Re: Avodah V4 #399
• Tephillah laMelech
• Re: Learning Schedule
• Re: Avodah V4 #399
• Tephillah laMelech - humor alert
• R. Svei and YU
• Re: Study of History
• Re: Halachah and ...
• Re: Study of History
• Re: Chinuch along multiple tracks
• Re: Study of History
• Re: Women as Guests

q: if you are at a cemetery and there is no minyan near the grave itself, may 
one include other men outside of the area in order to recite kaddish or Keil 
Molei Rachamim?

Richard_wolpoe@ibi.com


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________


q: If there is no minyan present we do not say Kaddish. But is there an 
issur to do so?

KT,
YGB

In a message dated 3/1/00 1:49:59 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
richard_wolpoe@ibi.com writes:

> q: if you are at a cemetery and there is no minyan near the grave itself, 
may  
>  one include other men outside of the area in order to recite kaddish or 
Keil  
>  Molei Rachamim?

This is dealt with in O"C 55

Kol Tuv

Yitzchok Zirkind

Halevai we should all view ourselves as guests in shul.  Maybe then we would 
treat the place with more respect.

Gil Student
gil.student@citicorp.com

>>There is a famous Yerushalmi says that Hashem will take a person to task for 
not enjoying the pleasures of this world. I know I saw the Mishnah Berurah bring
this Yerushalmi, but now I can't find where. Could anybody who remembers where, 
or if they have any of the indexes of the Mishnah Berurah, please let me know 
where he brings it down. Thanx.>>

I can tell you that the Yerushalmi is at the very end of kiddushin.  RYF Perlow 
has an interesting application of this Yerushalmi in his Sefer Hamitzvos leRS"G 
on the mitzvah of shechitah.

RG Dubin wrote:

>>      My son would like to learn as much Mishnayos as possible for his Bar 
Mitzvah in August 2001.  Does anyone have a formal schedule based on X mishnayos
per day leading to finishing Y sdorim in Z time?>>

In the book The Meister Plan there is a list of how long it takes to finish the 
various areas of Torah given a set schedule.  I don't have the book but it's 
available at your local library (the same one I borrowed it from).

Gil Student
gil.student@citicorp.com

R' Svei's opposition to YU, as subsequent posters have pointed out, goes
beyond the concern about the loss of a gadol, it is concern about daos and
the hybrid of TuM.  The opposition to Touro as expressed by the Roshei
Yeshiva who opposed it (including Rav Moshe) and who continue to do so would
be a better example.  In that case it was articulated that the concern was
that certain talmidim who were capable of becoming gedolim and who would
otherwise not go to college, would do so if it was available in a more
convenient, more congenial flavor without mixed classes, etc. At the same
time some of the Yeshivas reperesented (TV, Chaim Berlin) permit their
students to attend since they see it as less problematic and disruptive to
the seder hayeshiva.

-----Original Message-----

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 13:20:42 +1100
From: SBA <sba@blaze.net.au>
Subject: Rav Svei and YU

From Shlomo B Abeles <sba@blaze.net.au>
Subject Rav Svei & YU

Carl Sherer wrote:

>>>R. Svei's hashkafas olam.....going to YU is b'dieved. The (not
unjustified)
>>>fear is that if R. Svei were to say "YU is just as good as going to
>>>Brisk," talmidim who were academically capable and socially able
>>>to adopt the "Torah only" approach, would instead go to YU adn
>>>become baalebatim. And .....a gadol hador could slip away ......<<<<

See Michtav M'Eliyohu Vol 3, p355-360 where Rav Dessler zt''l expresses
these
concerns and those of the Chazon Ish and Ponovitz Rov zt'l.

The Roedelheim and Koren have Rivavos {1st veis with a chataf patach} and other 
chumashim have riv'vos {the 1st veis with a sheva na}.  There is afaik a 
machlokes on double consonants, and that some make what would be the first shevo
into a chataf, 

Does anyhone out there know the original baalei plugta?  And if the shevo na is 
indeed in error, who then is the first to point this out?

Richard_Wolpoe@ibi.com


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: still more on diyyukim 



R'M Poppers asked about degeishim that appear in Heidenheim-Roedelheim but not 
in Koren, or Breuer. These differences are not connected with the above story. 
Heidenheim followed the 'Ein Hakoreh of YeHaV"I (R' Yekutiel Hakohen ben Yehuda 
of 
Prague, 13th goyishe century) who is known for over-dageshing and over-meteging.
Heidenheim states numerous times in his comments on 'Ein Hakoreh that he prefers
the kevi'a of YeHV"I on a word over all the other opinions  He put degeishim aft
er a 
sheva nach in words like ne'lam, va-ye'sor (et rikhbo but not oto l'eineihem). y
e'sham 
to point out that the words are not ne'elam, ye'esor, ye'esham with sheva na'. 
Koren, 
who generally follows Heidenheim, did not in this point (tartei mashma') and  we
ll as a 
few others. Breuer follows the majority rule and not Heidenheim. Menahem Cohen's
new Tanakh al pi haKeter also does not have the extra degeishim and has even les
s 
metagim than Dubno or Breuer.

D.




 .

From: "Carl and Adina Sherer" <sherer@actcom.co.il>
> On 29 Feb 00, at 21:52, Gershon Dubin wrote:
 
> > 	My son would like to learn as much Mishnayos as possible for his Bar
> > Mitzvah in August 2001.  Does anyone have a formal schedule based on X
> > mishnayos per day leading to finishing Y sdorim in Z time?
 
> Two mishnayos a day takes about six years, three mishnayos a 
> day takes about four (for all of Shas).

There are 523 perakim, so at a perek a day, it would be a bit under a
year and a half.  About 17 months and a few days.  If he started now
he could do the whole thing by August 2001, but it would take so much
time he probably wouldn't make time to learn to lein as well.

I did Seder Zeraim at that pace once, for a siyum erev Pesach.  74 perakim.
With Bartenura and some Ikar Tosfos Yom Tov; without that, you can't claim
to have learned the material well enough to make a siyum for exempting 
others (there was an article on this in the Journal of Halacha & Contemporary
Society some time back).

Miss a day, you 've got a lot to catch up on.  I had slipped a fair
bit in Kilayim, and some other places, so by the last week I was doing 2 a day,
and on the last day had to read 4 prakim.  I kinda burned out on limud Torah
for a few weeks after that.

Is there a connection between AIDS and circumcision? 
Researchers claim decade-old evidence has been ignored.

- - - - - - - - - - - -
By Hank Hyena 

Feb. 28, 2000 |Male circumcision could help diminish the HIV/AIDS pandemic in 
developing countries, but health professionals are reluctant to publicize 
this fact, according to an editorial in the Lancet by Daniel Halperin and 
Robert Bailey. The authors cite a study, published a decade ago, of 422 
Kenyan men who habitually visited prostitutes. The research showed that the 
uncircumcised men had an 8.2 times greater risk of infection. Of 38 
additional investigations, 27 from eight different countries found a similar 
association between uncut men and infection.

Halperin and Bailey say the startling statistics support the widely held 
theory that the foreskin "provides a vulnerable portal of entry to HIV and 
other pathogens ... such as chancroid, syphilis and herpes, that are known 
cofactors for HIV infection." 

<Snip>

The Lancet editorial ends with a plea to the international health community 
to assist the public with education, training and circumcision services, and 
they urge their colleagues to assist them in this mission. 
salon.com | Feb. 28, 2000

for entire article, see:
http://www.salon.com/health/sex/urge/world/2000/02/28/nakedaids/index.html

The chok l'yisrael has a perek a day - 6 days a week, one perek per seder.
On a non-leap year, it would mean doubling up for double parshiyos.
Having one day off (shabbos) gives you time to "catch up"

But, as you might have surmised by now, it does not finish shas.  So after a 
year you have 54 prokim per seder. Then you spend the 2nd year finishing the 
rest.

While the first pass at such a breakneck speed might not leave one with a sense 
of completion, it does provide time for chazarah.

Richard_Wolpoe@ibi.com


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Learning Schedule 

There are 523 perakim, so at a perek a day, it would be a bit under a 
year and a half.  About 17 months and a few days.  If he started now 
he could do the whole thing by August 2001, but it would take so much 
time he probably wouldn't make time to learn to lein as well.

> Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 08:17:54 EST
> From: Joelirich@aol.com
> Subject: Re: Study of History

> Halacha seems to recognize a category of  necshad (vyatza alav kol)
> that has nafka minot lhalacha. Does anyone know of sources where the
> source of the kol is defined(ie is it only a case where the original
> speaker actually was 1000% convinced that the individual had done the
> deed and there were no extenuating circumstances and went to a bet 
> din/rav to determine that he could speak of this since he saw a
> toelet.  If not do we have here a case where the original speaker
> acted kneged halacha and yet we act upon it anyway?)

What you are referring to (I think) is the heter of Dvarim ha'Nikarim. 
The Chofetz Chaim brings it (Clal 7 S'if 10, 11 and Beer Mayim 
Chaim there s"k 22). The source is a Gemara in Shabbos 56a 
regarding the maaseh of David, Tziva and M'fiboshes. The Chafetz 
Chaim says that it has to be "nikarim mamash," "mageios l'inyan 
ha'sipur" and "ra'a es ha'dvarim ha'nikarim b'atzmo." Even then, the 
Chafetz Chaim says we cannot accept and believe it unless it is 
impossible to find a tzad zchus. 

Even if there are dvarim ha'nikarim, this allows us to believe the 
matter to tell others, to cause financial loss to another or to hit 
another (Clal 7 S'if 12). 

Finally, one should take to heart the words of the Chofetz Chaim in 
the hagoo at the end of Clal 7 S'if 10:

"U'v'chol zos tzrichin l'hizaher m'od v'lachkor b'sheva chakiros im 
haim b'emes dvarim ha'nikarim, v'lizoher b'chol ha'tnaim shetzrich 
lazeh... ki ha'yezter mate'h es ha'adam bazeh m'od u'mareh lo 
kama dvarim ha'nikarim she'haim emes, kdei she'yaamin bazeh 
v'yilkedenu al ydei zeh b'reshes shel avon kabalas lashon hara, v'al 
kein al yimaher l'hokel bazeh." 

Of course if there are dvarim ha'nikarim the person who heard it 
may be able to disclose it further if he fulfills the seven tnaim that 
the Chafetz Chaim brings in Clal 10 S'if 2. These are (in my loose 
and abridged English translation):

1. That the person must see the thing about which he is speaking 
himself (i.e. not "I read it in the newspaper" or "I saw it on CNN"), 
and not just have heard it from others unless it later becomes clear 
to him that the thing is true. The Chafetz Chaim doesn't really 
explain there how it becomes "clear" that something is true and in 
S'if 14 there when he repeats the seven tnaim, he omits "unless it 
later becomes clear to him that the thing is true." But in the Beer 
Mayim Chaim there in s"k 5 he brings from the Shaarei Tshuva 221 
that in order to be able to repeat the story, he must be in a position 
to be an eid in Beis Din! So it doesn't sound like it being "clear" to 
us that something is true is a real heter to go ahead and repeat it, 
although it may be a heter to be choshesh for it and maybe even to 
believe it.

2. That he should not decide immediately whether the matter 
constitutes damage. 

3. That he should reproach the sinner gently first, and only if the 
sinner will not listen should he then reproach him publicly. (This is 
an oversimplification - before deciding whether someone has 
sinned, the Chafetz Chaim (IMHO) would require that one first 
examine the action with all possible means of being melamed 
zchus).

4. That he should not exaggerate the wrongdoing.

5. That he should have in mind a specific, positive purpose and not 
to benefit from the defect he is attributing to the other person and 
not because of any pre-existing resentment he has for that person.

6. If he could bring about the same purpose by another means that 
would not require saying the Lashon Hara, then he is forbidden 
from saying the Lashon Hara in any event.

7. That there should be no more damage to the person about whom 
the Lashon Hara is said than would be the case if he testified to 
the same facts in a Beis Din.

-- Carl


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

Carl and Adina Sherer
mailto:sherer@actcom.co.il

Jeff Zuckerman wrote:

>>       4.  Finally, having now mentioned the term <<Gadol haDor>>, I have a
question that has bothered me through a number of threads on Avodah
(although this has nothing whatsoever to do with RCS' post):  would it
ever
be possible, and if so under what circumstances, for a gadol to cease
being
a gadol, and thus lose his entitlement to whatever presumptions are
accorded
a gadol?
<<

What about Yochanan Cohen Gadol?

David Riceman

Toby Rubinson recently asked for sources RE tephilah lishlom haMedinah
(TlShM). It made me wonder about a similar issue, hopefull people can help
with this one.

There is a pretty clear chiyuv, from Chazal through the 19th century, to
daven for the wellfare of the country you live in. So, on what grounds do
so many of us skip it? This is particularly odd, as it's a change in nusach
haTefillah -- the exact flip-side of the argument many of the same shuls
use to decline adding the TlShM!

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 29-Feb-00: Shelishi, Vayakhel
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Rosh-Hashanah 2a
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         

On 1 Mar 00, at 15:18, jjbaker@panix.com wrote:

> There are 523 perakim, so at a perek a day, it would be a bit under a
> year and a half.  About 17 months and a few days.  If he started now
> he could do the whole thing by August 2001, but it would take so much
> time he probably wouldn't make time to learn to lein as well.

I wouldn't advise doing it this way, especially with a child. For 
example, in Avos you have prokim that are over 20 Mishnayos. 
That's a lot for a kid to learn in a day, let alone retain.

> I did Seder Zeraim at that pace once, for a siyum erev Pesach.  74 perakim.
> With Bartenura and some Ikar Tosfos Yom Tov; without that, you can't claim
> to have learned the material well enough to make a siyum for exempting 
> others (there was an article on this in the Journal of Halacha & Contemporary
> Society some time back).

My kids learn Mishnayos with Kehati. For that matter, so did I 
when I was a bochur.

-- Carl


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

Carl and Adina Sherer
mailto:sherer@actcom.co.il

In a message dated 3/1/00 4:32:35 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
driceman@WORLDNET.ATT.NET writes:

> What about Yochanan Cohen Gadol?
>  

Or Rabon Gamleal in Brochos, but there are clear Halochos in YD that deal 
with this question.

Kol Tuv

Yitzchok Zirkind

Perhaps the grounds are that "wellfare" is no longer politcally correct?

Richard_Wolpoe@ibic.om




______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Tephillah laMelech 


There is a pretty clear chiyuv, from Chazal through the 19th century, to daven 
for the wellfare of the country you live in. So, on what grounds do so many of 
us skip it? 
-mi

-- 

From Shlomo B Abeles <sba@blaze.net.au>
Subject: R. Svie & YU

> Carl Sherer wrote:
>
> >>>R. Svei's hashkafas olam.... talmidim who were academically capable ...
> >>>to adopt the "Torah only" approach, would instead go to YU and .....a gadol hador could slip
away ......<<<<
>
> See Michtav M'Eliyohu Vol 3, p355-360 where Rav Dessler zt''l expresses these
> concerns and those of the Chazon Ish and Ponovitz Rov zt'l.

>>> Where is the Chazon Ish or the Ponovezher Rov's views written down?<<<

Page 359.

SBA

In v4n397, Chana Luntz <Chana/Heather@luntz.demon.co.uk> writes:
: Since, however, I have a great deal of difficulty (British
: understatement here!) in attributing loshen hora (or, alternatively,
: unnecessary loshen hora) to HaShem...

There are limits to the applicability of halachah to HKBH. For example, He
apparantly violates "lo sa'amod al dam rei'echa" with regularity. Similarly
He starts fires on Shabbos, vechulu, vechulu...

In the case of L"H, there is real reason to excempt Hashem. The Ch"Ch writes
that one may not even speak ill of himself, since his reputation belongs to
Hashem, not to himself. If we're to view this as a kind of geneivah, then
perhaps the Owner has permission where we don't.

Aside from that, the whole question of theodicy is because we are incapable
of judging the to'eles for which He does things. How then can we assess if
His lashon hara is lito'eles or not? We need to just rely on the fact that
He doesn't do things without a reason. In which case, we are assuming the
to'eles exists, it's not lashon hara, and we will never fully understand why.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 29-Feb-00: Shelishi, Vayakhel
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Rosh-Hashanah 2a
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         

In v4n396, Michael Poppers <MPoppers@kayescholer.com> writes:
: > Yaakov ish tam yosheiv ohalim. <

: "Yes, but."  As we all know, Ya'akov maintained this state
: for only the first part of his life...

This is a question on the medrash, not on R' YAA Krieger's comments or my
own.

I think your problem is that you assume Yaakov lived in a bayis. I was trying
to say that Ya'akov spent his life building a bayis. "Bais Ya'akov lichu
vineilcha bi'or Hashem".

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 29-Feb-00: Shelishi, Vayakhel
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Rosh-Hashanah 2a
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         

In v4n398, Carl Sherer <sherer@actcom.co.il> writes:
:               The Chafetz Chaim makes quite clear that Miriam 
: spoke only to herself.... Had Hashem not punished her so openly, 
: Bnei Yisrael would never have known about it.

Hashem punished her openly? How? He made a point of not moving the amud
ha'anan / ha'eish while Miriam has tzora'as. As the intervals over which
it moved was pretty random, no one is going to wonder about it. OTOH, had
HKBH made the camp move during that week, and the Be'eir Miriam would have
stayed behind with her -- THAT would have been befarhesia.

Who other than her brothers knew?

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 29-Feb-00: Shelishi, Vayakhel
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Rosh-Hashanah 2a
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         

In v4n403 (volume 5 will be only 3 months not 6, b"n)  R' Rich Wolpoe writes:
> Didn't RSR Hirsch suggest a 2-track model oen for the Yaakovs and one
> for the Eisavs?

In the same volume R' Carl Sherer agrees:
: That's how I would understand his comments on Eisav. But as I 
: think we went through on this list not too long ago, Rav Dessler 
: had a very different hashkafa.

I didn't take it that way. RSRH was suggesting "chanoch lina'ar al pi darko".
The only reason why it looks like he's describing two tracks, instead of a
more general and more broad approach is because Yitzchak and Rivka, the case
in discussion, only had two children.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 29-Feb-00: Shelishi, Vayakhel
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Rosh-Hashanah 2a
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         

In a message dated 3/1/00 6:38:57 PM US Central Standard Time, 
micha@aishdas.org writes:

<< Aside from that, the whole question of theodicy is because we are incapable
 of judging the to'eles for which He does things. How then can we assess if
 His lashon hara is lito'eles or not? We need to just rely on the fact that
 He doesn't do things without a reason. In which case, we are assuming the
 to'eles exists, it's not lashon hara, and we will never fully understand why.
  >>

MI states: "He doesn't do things without a reason." Certainly. But what does 
MI mean by "reason"? Reason in the sense of (i) explanation? (ii) purpose? 
(iii) rationale? (iv) cause-and-effect? (v) a course of logic understandable 
by human beings (cf. Rambam, Aristotle)? (vi) a course of logic beyond the 
understanding of human beings? (vii) a poetic logic understandable only as a 
form of imagery (cf. Plato)? (viii) a paradigm beyond the concept of logic 
itself, e.g., the notion of the Divine Dream?

Please specify, comprehensively, in a short paragraph of 25 words or less. 
Thanks.

David Finch

R' Rich Wolpoe <richard_wolpoe@ibi.com> writes in v4n402:
: why does Rosh Hashono have so many threes (malhuyos zichronos shofros,
: shevorim etc.) and Pesachc fours (arbo leshonos of geulo, four sons) etc.

: Answer: On RH the three corresponds to avos. ...
: Pesach the four corresponds to imahos. ...

To take this idea one step further... I've posted numerous times in the
past (including last week) about the avos as amudei olam, the relationships
that a person has, and the worlds that he lives in.

In birchas avos, the three avos are followed by a four-fold reference to
HKBH -- "HaKel, haGadol, haGibbor, vihaNora". (The Gaon asserts that these
are four nouns, not one noun and three adjectives.)

What we see is that three represents what man brings to his relationship with
Hashem, and four is what we recieve from him. The connection to the avos
vs. the imahos is very Zohar-like, although I didn't see it there. (Not that
I looked.)

Pesach was recieved, not earned. Nissan is a time of rachamim, not merit.
Therefore, on Pesach we focus on what we recieve. Tishrei, however, is where
we look at din, at what we, by following the avos as archetypes, can do.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 29-Feb-00: Shelishi, Vayakhel
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Rosh-Hashanah 2a
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         

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


[ 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         ]