Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 407

Thursday, March 2 2000

• Re: Principles For Sale - Contact Shas
• Re: Principles For Sale - Contact Shas
• Re: Principles For Sale - Contact Shas
• Re: Study of History
• Re: Tephillah laMelech
• Re: Tephillah laMelech
• Re: Tephillah laMelech
• Re: Principles For Sale - Contact Shas
• Re: Tephillah laMelech
• Principles For Sale - Contact Shas
• Re: Tephillah laMelech
• Re: secular studies and mechanchim
• Study of History
• Re: Tephillah laMelech
• Re: Principles For Sale - Contact Shas
• Re: Principles For Sale - Contact Shas
• Re: Principles For Sale
• Shas/Politics vs. Separation of Church and State
• Rav Ovadia Yosef and halachic status of the Golan
• Re: more diyyukim, dechik ati merachik
• Re: diyukim, Ha-shalom
• Re: Principles For Sale - Contact Shas

In a message dated 3/2/00 8:23:34 AM US Central Standard Time, 
hmaryles@yahoo.com writes:

<< Maybe R. Yosf feels that Israel retaining the Golan
 has absolutely no halachic significance.  Maybe he
 feels that it has no strategic signifcance.  I don't
 know.  But why should a recognizable group be
 percieved by the entire civilized world as a sell-out
 for money?
 
 Isn't that a chilul HaShem? >>

Separation of church and state. The one and only answer.

David Finch

Harry Maryles wrote:



> It is the Perception by the Secular Media (eg the
> Tribune) that an Orthodox group, one which represents
> the Torah, will sell out at all... for money, whatever
> it's intentions. This perception needs to be changed
> and Shas needs to do something about it. Kavod HaTorah
> is at stake.


Yes, Shas needs to do something about it. But I said this morming, and I
stick by it, The Secular Media creates that perception. Shas' giving in
on certain matters in order to release the funds they should be
receiving anyway has helped to foster it, but without the Media leading
the way, it wouldn't be a general perception (if it even is).


---sam

DFinchPC@aol.com wrote:


> 
> Separation of church and state. The one and only answer.
> 


Are you serious?


---sam

About waiting for Miriam...

On Thu, Mar 02, 2000 at 09:56:51AM -0500, Gershon Dubin wrote:
: <<Who other than her brothers knew?>>

: 	I never looked at it that way.  Then I considered WHY I hadn't and
: realized that there are millions of people through the doros who were
: 'told' about the incident!

Okay, so I inadvertantly went too far. Still, I think my reasoning is
sound. Waiting for Miriam to heal was less (keeping it relative, so as
to avoid your correction) obvious than not waiting, and in this hiding of
information was the kavod shown to her.

-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 2 Mar 00, at 11:42, gil.student@citicorp.com wrote:

> RC Sherer wrote:
> 
> >>So then how do you teitch the Mishne in Avos ("hevei mispallel b'shloma shel 
> malchus").>>
> 
> You may (i.e. it is muttar) to pray for the peace of the government.

That's a plausible explanation for the first part - until you look at the 
second part (which is what I'm referring to). That sounds less like 
"muttar" and more like (at least) that it is a very good idea.

> I'm not endorsing it.  I'm just saying what someone suggested to be meyashev a 
> widespread minhag.

I think the Mishna is clearly against the minhag. But I'm not sure 
how you can be meyashev the minhag.

-- Carl


Carl M. Sherer, Adv.
Silber, Schottenfels, Gerber & Sherer
Telephone 972-2-625-7751
Fax 972-2-625-0461
mailto:cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il
mailto:sherer@actcom.co.il

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.

On Thu, Mar 02, 2000 at 06:35:36PM +0200, Carl M. Sherer wrote:
: So then how do you teitch the Mishne in Avos ("hevei mispallel 
: b'shloma shel malchus").

Not to lost sight of my original question, this is only one of the two
issues. The other is the change of nusach. Unless you could argue, as the
M"A apparantly would, that the minhag was /wrong/, what right do we have
to just drop something from the siddur?

-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 2 Mar 00, at 11:22, Micha Berger wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 02, 2000 at 06:35:36PM +0200, Carl M. Sherer wrote:
> : So then how do you teitch the Mishne in Avos ("hevei mispallel 
> : b'shloma shel malchus").
> 
> Not to lost sight of my original question, this is only one of the two
> issues. The other is the change of nusach. Unless you could argue, as the
> M"A apparantly would, that the minhag was /wrong/, what right do we have
> to just drop something from the siddur?

While this wouldn't work everywhere, I suppose that you could 
argue that in places where there is no absolute ruler (e.g. 
democracies), the position of the Jews is no longer dependent 
upon the whims of the "malchus." For that to work, however, I think 
you would have to correlate between the time when the tfilla was 
dropped from the siddur and the second half of the 18th or first half 
of the 19th century. I don't have the historical background to do that 
- maybe someone else does.

The reason I have a hava amina that there could even be something 
to the previous paragraph, is that I remember as an American being 
shocked the first time I spent Shabbos in London twenty years ago 
hearing that the shul (whose name I no longer remember, but I 
think it was the Shabbos I spent in Edgeware) said the tfilla for the 
Royal family. I don't even remember the Prime Minister being 
mentioned. 

-- Carl


Carl M. Sherer, Adv.
Silber, Schottenfels, Gerber & Sherer
Telephone 972-2-625-7751
Fax 972-2-625-0461
mailto:cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il
mailto:sherer@actcom.co.il

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.

In a message dated 3/2/00 11:07:42 AM US Central Standard Time, 
sambo@charm.net writes:

<< 
 > 
 > Separation of church and state. The one and only answer.
 > 
 
 
 Are you serious?
  >>

Absolutely. Judaism -- all real religion, for that matter -- is ultimately 
about the pursuit of purity, the dream of perfection. Politics in a 
democratic state require all sorts of dirty little (and not so little) 
compromises, which promotes the usual lineup of back-stabbing, bribery, 
lying, cheating, etc. Religion soils itself when it participates in the 
give-and-take of such politics. That's why we all suffered the spectacle of 
watching the great Israeli Gedolim endorsing Bibi Netanyahu in the last 
election. 

I like the American system better. In the U.S., the system enables one to be 
any sort of Jew he or she wants to be without secular political gamesmanship. 
Freedom of religion is sacrosanct. No place on earth has even been as good 
for the Jews as the U.S. -- including Israel.

David Finch

RC Sherer wrote:

>>The reason I have a hava amina that there could even be something to the 
previous paragraph, is that I remember as an American being shocked the first 
time I spent Shabbos in London twenty years ago hearing that the shul (whose 
name I no longer remember, but I think it was the Shabbos I spent in Edgeware) 
said the tfilla for the Royal family. I don't even remember the Prime Minister 
being mentioned.>>

The American one is for the nasi umishneihu - the President and Vice 
President.  Since when does the VP hold any power?

> Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 06:23:20 -0800 (PST)
> From: Harry Maryles <hmaryles@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Principles For Sale - Contact Shas

<<Whether this is the case or not, why is it that a strongly identifiable
orthodox group, headed by a Gadol of the stature of R. Ovadia Yosef,  can
be so easily percieved as willing to sell out it's values for money?>>

	Why believe the stuff that is put out under the auspices of Israeli
journalism.? Their standards for telling the truth when it comes to
Charedim in general and Charedim as political foes in particular runs a
close second to Izvestia.

Gershon
gershon.dubin@juno.com

On 2 Mar 00, at 13:05, gil.student@citicorp.com wrote:

> RC Sherer wrote:
> 
> >>The reason I have a hava amina that there could even be something to the 
> previous paragraph, is that I remember as an American being shocked the first 
> time I spent Shabbos in London twenty years ago hearing that the shul (whose 
> name I no longer remember, but I think it was the Shabbos I spent in Edgeware) 
> said the tfilla for the Royal family. I don't even remember the Prime Minister 
> being mentioned.>>
> 
> The American one is for the nasi umishneihu - the President and Vice 
> President.  Since when does the VP hold any power?

Well, he is the President pro tempore of the Senate.... And who 
else would you say it for in the States? Congress?

But I think that's exactly why (in my experience at least) most 
shuls in the States do not say it - because the President has little 
power over the daily life of the average citizen (he can't just decide 
to put you in jail for example), as a king did in previous times. And 
note that the language of the Mishna is "shloma shel MALCHUS." 
(Okay, admittedly at the time of the Mishna there weren't many 
other forms of government).

All of which is of course irrelevant to Israel (which was the original 
poster's question) where it used to be a political issue until, over 
the last ten years or so, many DL shuls have also stopped saying 
it.

-- Carl


Carl M. Sherer, Adv.
Silber, Schottenfels, Gerber & Sherer
Telephone 972-2-625-7751
Fax 972-2-625-0461
mailto:cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il
mailto:sherer@actcom.co.il

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.

In a message dated 3/2/00 8:47:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
turkel@math.tau.ac.il writes:

<< I think basically all the roshei yeshiva at YU (including Rav Aharon
 Soloveitchik and Rav Schacter) have an extensive secular background and
 several have PhDs. In terms of level that merely means that RYBS was
 above others in terms of intellect. >>

Who at RIETS has a PHD, besides R' Tendler?

Jordan

>On Thu, Mar 02, 2000 at 07:55:17AM +0200, Carl and Adina Sherer wrote:
>:         Rashi there brings a Medrash that b'schar that Miriam 
>: waited for Moshe by the Yeor, Hashem made all of Bnei Yisrael 
>: wait for Miriam. IMHO that only works if Bnei Yisrael knew why 
>: they were waiting, as Miriam knew why she was waiting by the 
>: Yeor.
>
>And I was explaining the Rashi lehefech! The kavod for Miriam is that they
>/didn't/ know why they were waiting. Hashem thereby saved her embarassment,
>because, as I wrote last time, they would have noticed (first time they
>wanted something to wash down that mun) if they moved on without her.
>Hashem hid her tzara'as from the kahal by making them wait -- and that
>kindness was the kavod He showed her.

B'nei Yisroel did not realize that Miriam was outside of the camp for seven
days?

-- Eric

On Thu, Mar 02, 2000 at 11:42:46AM -0500, gil.student@citicorp.com wrote:
:>So then how do you teitch the Mishne in Avos ("hevei mispallel b'shloma shel 
:>malchus").

: You may (i.e. it is muttar) to pray for the peace of the government.

Hevei is lashon tzivui. Not "you may", but "you ought", "you shall", or "you
must".

-mi

On 2 Mar 00, at 12:48, DFinchPC@aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 3/2/00 11:07:42 AM US Central Standard Time, 
> sambo@charm.net writes:

>  > Separation of church and state. The one and only answer.
>  > 
>  
>  
>  Are you serious?
>   >>
> 
> Absolutely. 

Not. IMNSHO, there is no justification for a "State of Israel" unless 
it is a Jewish State. If it's not a Jewish State, how do we justify 
"kicking out the Arabs?" (Assuming we ever did that - the world 
obviously thinks we did). How do we justify all kinds of special 
privileges for coming here that are only available to Jews? Take 
religion out of the State and we become k'chol hagoyim and have 
no more right to be here than anyone else. 

Judaism -- all real religion, for that matter -- is ultimately 
> about the pursuit of purity, the dream of perfection. Politics in a 
> democratic state require all sorts of dirty little (and not so little) 
> compromises, which promotes the usual lineup of back-stabbing, bribery, 
> lying, cheating, etc. Religion soils itself when it participates in the 
> give-and-take of such politics. That's why we all suffered the spectacle of 
> watching the great Israeli Gedolim endorsing Bibi Netanyahu in the last 
> election. 

Did it ever occur to you that the Gdolim endorsed Bibi because of 
something other than money? Do you really think all the Gdolim 
are after is money and power? Because I can assure you that the 
Gdolim didn't have to endorse Bibi to get the fruhm to vote for him, 
and they endorsed him out of fear that Barak would forge a 
coalition with Meretz, Shinui and the Arabs and that fruhm Jews 
would have a lot of problems that go far beyond money.

Do you think that the Gdolim in America don't tell their 
constituencies how to vote?

> I like the American system better. In the U.S., the system enables one to be 
> any sort of Jew he or she wants to be without secular political gamesmanship. 
> Freedom of religion is sacrosanct. No place on earth has even been as good 
> for the Jews as the U.S. -- including Israel.

Only someone living in America could make a comment like that.

Funny - didn't they say the same kinds of things about Germany in 
the 20's and 30's?

-- Carl


Carl M. Sherer, Adv.
Silber, Schottenfels, Gerber & Sherer
Telephone 972-2-625-7751
Fax 972-2-625-0461
mailto:cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il
mailto:sherer@actcom.co.il

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.

In a message dated 3/2/00 12:44:38 PM US Central Standard Time, 
cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il writes:

<< Not. IMNSHO, there is no justification for a "State of Israel" unless 
 it is a Jewish State. If it's not a Jewish State, how do we justify 
 "kicking out the Arabs?" (Assuming we ever did that - the world 
 obviously thinks we did). How do we justify all kinds of special 
 privileges for coming here that are only available to Jews? Take 
 religion out of the State and we become k'chol hagoyim and have 
 no more right to be here than anyone else. >>

I don't think you can justify such things, other, perhaps, than the Law of 
Return.
 
 
 <<Did it ever occur to you that the Gdolim endorsed Bibi because of 
 something other than money? Do you really think all the Gdolim 
 are after is money and power? Because I can assure you that the 
 Gdolim didn't have to endorse Bibi to get the fruhm to vote for him, 
 and they endorsed him out of fear that Barak would forge a 
 coalition with Meretz, Shinui and the Arabs and that fruhm Jews 
 would have a lot of problems that go far beyond money.>>

I don't think the Israeli Gedolim are necessarily after money and power. But 
when they are forced to be political, they must perforce play politics. Their 
motives may be pure. The "practical" steps they must pursue are far from 
pure. And if they don't stand for purity, who will?

 <<Do you think that the Gdolim in America don't tell their 
 constituencies how to vote?>>

Tell, maybe. It is only when the followers of American Gedolim succumb to the 
cult of personality that the followers necessarily follow such commands. 
There is a tradition here of free thought.


 > I like the American system better. In the U.S., the system enables one to 
be 
 > any sort of Jew he or she wants to be without secular political 
gamesmanship. 
 > Freedom of religion is sacrosanct. No place on earth has even been as good 
 > for the Jews as the U.S. -- including Israel.
 
 <<Only someone living in America could make a comment like that.>>

Maybe. Living in America promotes positive comments like that. Living in 
Israel promotes cynicism and despair. That's emes -- you know I'm right.
 
<< Funny - didn't they say the same kinds of things about Germany in 
 the 20's and 30's?
  >>

No. Germany was never democratic, never a melting pot, never egalitarian. 
German Jews who aspired to be "German" pursued an unreachable goal. American 
Jews don't aspire to be American. Whether they wish it or not, they *are* 
American, just like all the other polyglot minorities over here who look and 
act even more foreign to the now-discarded Leave-It-To-Beaver WASP media 
ideal. Nowadays American popular culture really does embrace diversity. 
Orthodox Jews, even the most RW, are free here, although they may be too 
guilty or confused by that fact to feel it or to admit it.

Analogies to prewar Germany are trite. You can do better than that.

David Finch

RH Maryles wrote:

>>It is the Perception by the Secular Media (eg the Tribune) that an Orthodox 
group, one which represents the Torah, will sell out at all... for money, 
whatever it's intentions. This perception needs to be changed and Shas needs to 
do something about it. Kavod HaTorah is at stake.>>

One of the reasons that Am Echad Resources was started was to counter such 
negative stereotypes and misleading stories.  Maybe you could write a letter to 
the editor to the Tribune?

Gil Student

I think the second topic is a legitimate one for Avodah, but I cannot see
how the first topic constitues a constructive endeavor on our part.

KT,
YGB

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

Indeed, Rav Ovadia Yosef does NOT accord any halachic status of Eretz
Yisrael to the Golan. I believe this was also the shitta of Rav Goren.

Josh

I  was asked to explain the dechik behavior of KUmu tz'u. I believe my original posting 
mentioned that the dechik - atei me'rachik is not limited to beged-kefet and gave the 
example of yih'ye lo with dagesh  in the lamed. 

The  non beged-kefet dechiks are quite numerous in the Torah.. While many of the 
"rishonim" (in the field of mesora) do not mention it, Ben Bila'am in Ta'amei Hamikra 
does mention that the dechik - bitul rafeh rule applies also to non beged- kefet.  The 
dagesh is then a dagesh chazak of course.  Examples: chalila Lakh, ve-'asita TZitz, 
also many of the mileil words followed by lakh and lekha and lo,  both with makaf  and 
without e.g., ta'aseh lakh, ve-haya lekha, tih'ye lo.  A peculiar one near the end of 
Bereishit, according to Heidenheim from YHV"I, shama Kaveru et Avraham. The first 
time in the sentence with dagesh(Avraham) the second (Yitzhak) without and, still in 
the same sentence, shama kavarti (Leah), without.  Koren, as usual, follows 
Heidenheim. Neither MBreuer nor Keter-MCohen have the kuf degusha at all. And then 
there are the weirdos such as machatzta Rosh in Habakkuk and me'uma Ra' in 
Yirmeyahu 39, both with dagesh in the reish! Now that's a really strong bittul of the 
rafeh rule.

I am far from an expert on this, to me, very difficult subject. For that reason, I posted 
only a so-called summary of the details such as makaf - no makaf, kametz or other 
vowel, etc. without explaining further.  To make it worse, different experts give 
different definitions of dechik and atei merachik. Some even say marchik instead of 
merachik, something which may be a reversal of the purpose of the rule.  I can quote 
from the "rishonim" because I remember where they say things in their books and can 
find the place. I'm not the one for understanding all of what they say or for complete 
detailed explanations.  For that, you have to go to the researchers and scholars 
whose field it is.

I just discovered that an acquaintance is a lurker because he asked me what I meant 
by paraphrasing and summarizing Ben Asher "without the rhyme".
The Baer-Strack edition is eclectic using a number of different manuscript and picking 
out  what it considers most reliable and accurate  There are some 50 manuscripts in 
various museums and libraries. Much of what Ben Asher wrote was in rhyme. With 
the rhyme and the sometimes stilted and difficult language, I sometimes have to read 
over and over to catch on to what he is saying (not always successful).  Aharon Dotan 
put out another edition in which he claims that much of the not rhymed paragraphs of 
B-S and the mss are not from B"A but were insertions by the copyists of the marginal 
additions or comments made by later masoretic scholars.

And that's it for today.  I hope to get around to confusing you all with my comments on 
the Mordechai sheva-hataf controversy before Purim but it requires a lot of hakdamot 
on hatafim and sheva na' as a prerequisite.  We'll see.


BTW, that's Yehuda Ben Bila'am (a.k.a. Balam) (13th goyishe century) mentioned 
above, not Avraham de Balmes (15th, 16th?)

berakhot ve-khu',

David

About Oseh Hashalom bimromav in kaddish in "aseret yemei teshuva: 

The nusach Bavel ends the shemoneh esrei  with hamevarekh et 'amo Yisrael 
bashalom.  The last berakha in nusach Eretz Yisrael is Oseh hashalom.  (There is 
some evidence that the berakha oseh hashalom was not completely unknown in 
Bavel.)

There are quite a number of examples of two nus'chaot being honored by each being 
used at a different place or different occasion (e.g., hamachazir shechinato... and 
sh'otekha levadekha... or ga'al Yisrael and tzur Yisrael vegoalo or sim shalom and 
shalom rav).  The berakha Oseh hashalom was assigned  by some to replace  Bavel's 
hamevarekh during the 'asseret yemei teshuva.  IMH"O there were those who did not 
accept the change of berakha, but knew about the decision that on 'aseret yemei 
teshuva one said oseh hashalom at the end of shemoneh esrei. They prefixed the Ha- 
to the shalom of the oseh shalom bimromav at the end of shemoneh esrei and also in 
kaddish. I believe that the existence of two nus'chaot of the last berakha of shmoneh 
esrei indicates that the Ha-shalom was not originally meant for oseh shalom 
bimromav.  (There's an hidden assumption here that Oseh shalom was said at the 
end of Elohai netzor at the time that Oseh replaced Hamevarekh in 'aseret yemei 
teshuva. This is doubtful and should be checked. Maybe Avodah's walking 
encyclopedia of mekorot, RYZ, can tell us when the berakha switching was made.

And a comment on the postings concerning our saying imru Amen quietly at the end 
of oseh shalom in the shmoneh esrei:

Following the example of Moshe Rabbeinu in Va'etchanan, after praising God in 
pesukei de-zimra and then stating our belief and acceptance in shema we then 
approach the throne to make our  requests. So, as supplicants before the king, and 
having made our more public announcements before the court, we walk three steps 
forward toward the throne and quietly present our requests.  After finishing shmoneh 
esrei, which nowadays ends with oseh shalom bimromav, we step back from the kisei 
hakavod and stand a while so as not to dismiss ourselves too abruptly from His 
presence. 

Why do we step back at the end of kaddish?

In the case of the hazan in the chazara, it might be considered tircha de-tzibura to 
take the time to step back after hamevarekh..... bashalom and yihyu le-ratzon. So the 
hazan may remain "up close" to the kisei hakavod until after the kaddish and  step 
back then.  In all other kaddishim, IMHO, stepping back in oseh shalom is copycatting 
from shemoneh esrei or from the hazan. Similarly, IMHO, the imru amen in shmoneh 
esrei is copycatting from kaddish.  BT"W, neither the Sa'adia Gaon nor Amram Gaon 
siddurim have the oseh shalom sentence in Elohai netzor They do have a short 
personal prayer starting with Elohai netzor and ending with yih'yu le-ratzon without 
the additional request for shalom.

Shalom is one of the most important requirements in life. We, especially, needed 
shalom during our long history of living among goyim and suffering persecution. It is 
not surprising, therefore, that a request for shalom was added at the end our prayers 
both at the end of shmoneh esrei and at the kaddish (today, kaddishes) recited after 
completing the "official" davening.  I don't remember just where, but I have seen early 
siddurim where oseh shalom appears in Elohai netzor but without the word ve-imru or 
without imeru Amen. 

In a message dated 3/2/00 1:27:14 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
gershon.dubin@juno.com writes:

<< 
    Why believe the stuff that is put out under the auspices of Israeli
 journalism.? Their standards for telling the truth when it comes to
 Charedim in general and Charedim as political foes in particular runs a
 close second to Izvestia.
 
 Gershon
 gershon.dubin@juno.com
 
  >>
What would be helpful is an alternative explanation of a particular set of 
undisputed facts.

Kol Tuv
Joel Rich

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


[ 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         ]