Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 480

Tuesday, April 4 2000

< Previous Next >
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 13:15:31 EDT
From: Pawshas@aol.com
Subject:
Re: Maror and Horseradish


R' Micha Berger wrote:
> Romaine lettuce and endives don't necessarily make one "mar". Horseradish 
> does.

Unless you're the Chazon Ish, though (who was Makpid for this), Maror doesn't 
have to be bitter - it must only become bitter as it ages.

Mordechai
Cong. Ohave Shalom, YI of Pawtucket, RI http://members.tripod.com/~ohave
HaMakor! http://www.aishdas.org/hamakor Mareh Mekomos Reference Library
WEBSHAS! http://www.aishdas.org/webshas Indexing the Talmud, Daf by Daf


Go to top.

Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 12:36:51 -0500
From: "Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer" <sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>
Subject:
Fw: Ruchani Eye on Rabbi Ovadaih Yosef, shlita


This is some unsolicited e-mail I receive, and, to be honest, do not
normally read. But since it, too, concerns proper perspective on ROY's
public comments, it caught my eye this time.

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

----- Original Message -----
From: <ABZadok@aol.com>
To: <ABZadok@aol.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2000 9:45 AM
Subject: Ruchani Eye on Rabbi Ovadaih Yosef, shlita


> B"H
> 28 Adar 2, 5760 - 4 April 2000
>
> A Ruchani Eye on Israel
> A Service of the Panu Derekh On-Line Journal for Torah Spirituality
> Brought to you by Yeshivat Benei N'vi'im
> Visit us at www.koshertorah.com
>
> Purim & Pesah - It Sure Is A Time Of Miracles
> Follow-up & Commentary on the Investigation of Rabbi Ovadiah Yosef
>
> According to a feature in the Jerusalem Post On Line edition (dated 4
April
> 2000), the Police investigation of Rabbi Ovadiah Yosef is having a
> dramatically positive effect!  It appears that many sectors of the
Ashkenazi
> Haredi world are rallying around Rav Ovadiah in support of him.  The
Agudat
> Yisrael and even the Edah HaHaredit, a known non-supporter of Rav Ovadiah
is
> making its presence known in support of the Rav.  Although the Litvak
> Rabbanim are not so vocal about their support, the Jerusalem Post quotes
> sources that their support is there quietly.
>
> What can we say other than Barukh HaShem!  Torah Judaism is uniting!  And
all
> it took was a modern day Haman and a modern day Mordecahi to stand up to
him.
>
> While no one knows for sure where the Police investigation of Rav Ovadiah
> will go, nonetheless, everyone in Israel knows one thing for sure.  If
(G-d
> forbid) the State would be foolish enough to indite Rav Ovadiah and
attempt
> to bring him to court, the entire Haredi world will gather around him.
More
> than this, Rav Ovadiah is not the type to cave in under pressure.  If he
ends
> up in a courtroom, he will have a national forum, which he will take full
> advantage of to "tell it like it is."  If secular Israel did not like what
> Rav Ovadiah has said in the past, wait until you hear what he will say in
the
> future.
>
> In all due respect to the forces of democracy, secularism in Israeli has
> gotten way out of control.  The levels of irrationality and anti-religious
> hatred far surpass that which is here in the United States.
>
> When Rav Ovadiah called Yossi Sarid a "rasha" (wicked person) maybe this
was
> a wakeup call for the secular world to remind themselves that to call
> themselves Israelis, they must first be some type of Jew.  After all
Israel
> is called the Jewish homeland.  They must have some semblance of identity
> with Judaism or how can they call themselves Jews and Israelis?
>
> Maybe Rav Ovadiah's comments were harsh and maybe they were not!  What he
> said was clearly within the realms of Halakha.  This is evident from
anyone
> studying the Laws of Lashon HaRa from the Sefer Hafetz Haim.
>
> Were, however, his statements politically wise?  Well, let's analyze the
> results.
>
> The Haredi world is uniting; this is good.
>
> The secular world is furious, this is truly exposing how ANTI religious
they
> are.  This too is for good.
>
> Maybe some secular people will pause a moment and see how they are feeling
> about Jews, who are maintaining our thousands of years old culture and
> reconsider their hatred and their own relationship to what it means to be
a
> Jew and Israeli.  While this might not make all the seculars to be
religious,
> it might serve to at least return some of the lost respect which the
religion
> and religious rightly deserve.
>
> Rav Ovadiah spoke his words at Purim time.  Purim is special in that the
> Megilat Esther makes no mention of G-d whatsoever.  Some commentators
explain
> this to mean that while the Jewish people are in exile (without Temple and
> prophet), rather than wait for Heaven to take the lead in our redemption,
we
> have to take the first steps.  Indeed Mordechai and Esther did this.
>
> It appears that Rav Ovadiah is following in their suit.  His is not bowing
> down to the Hamans of Israeli political pressure.  He is rebuking the
> secular, as they deserve.  Someone needs to speak up and tell the truth
and
> bewail the loss of morals and values in the Holy Land.  If the leading
Torah
> Sage of the generation will not speak up, regardless of the cost, then who
> will?
>
> Pesah is upon us.  The word Pesah can also be understood as "Peh Sah" (the
> mouth speaks).  As HaShem spoke to us in Egypt calling us out of bondage,
we
> too must speak out today.  We must condemn the loss of morality and values
> not only among our brothers and sisters in Israel, but also here in the
> United States.
>
> Recently the leadership of Reform Judaism publicly announced their
> recognition of same sex marriages, in spite of the fact that G-d Himself
in
> the Bible (Lev. 18:22) calls homosexuality an abomination in His Eyes.
>
> I am not so concerned about the practices of the Reform Movement as I am
the
> ramifications of their actions on the rest of Judaism.  Newspaper reports
> around the world reported the story that the largest body of American
Jewry
> has moved to accept homosexuality.  Granted they all report that it is the
> Reform Movement who made this decision, but in the eyes of the world
> readership, which does not know the difference between one type of Jew and
> the next, all Jews are thereby being condemned as immoral!  Go on line and
> read the English version of European, Asian and Middle Eastern
(non-Israeli)
> newspapers and you will see what I mean.  Remember that millions of people
> around the world read these reports and believe them!
>
> Indeed even some Churches have called upon the Reform Movement to read the
> Bible and remember that they are supposed to be teaching what G-d in the
> Bible says!
>
> Well, it is Peh Sah; it is time for the mouth to relate the tale of our
> exodus from Egypt.  For those of us who have left Egypt, this is a joyous
> occasion.  Yet, many of our fellow Jews appear that they are still stuck
> there.  Maybe by opening our mouths just a bit, we can help remind them to
be
> Jewish and remind them about the privileges and responsibilities of
spiritual
> freedom.
>
> If this angers them, indeed I am sorry.  Nevertheless, should their anger
> silence the truth?  Please, you must know that the answer to this must be
a
> resounding NO!
>
> In our next Update:  What do you say that we surround Israel with nuclear
> landmines!   It is being done (according to the London Times).
>
> E-mail us at rabbi@koshertorah.com if you have any comments.
> Copyright  2000 by Yeshivat Benei N'vi'im.  All rights reserved.
> If you wish not to receive further mailings from us, please send us a
reply
> e-mail requesting such.
>


Go to top.

Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 12:54:28 -0500
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
Subject:
Re: matza shiurim


On Tue, Apr 04, 2000 at 09:44:19AM -0400, Sammy Ominsky wrote:
: So why insist on defining it by area filled instead of by weight? Weight
: will be consistent across all your measuring schemes.

RYGB addressed this already: a k'zayis is a unit volume.

To enlarge on his words... It seems like you're losing sight of the fact that
this is a general rule: achilah is defined as eating a solid the volume of a
k'zayis in the time of k'dei achilas p'ras. This is true whether the din is
matza or Yom Kippur, whether the food weighs as much as a k'zayis of egg yolk
or as little as one of celery.

You might be able to say that one k'zayis of *matza* weighs approximately 27g.
But this presupposes solving numerous problems: the weight of the wheat used,
the recipe (ratio of water to wheat) and the amount of evaporation and all
that is only after my questions about determining what volume a k'zayis
represents.

: Someone said earlier that the shiur of R' Naeh was generally accepted.

By you and your kehillah. Us American Ashkenazim never "generally accepted"
any one measure. Personally, I tend to use R' Moshe's 18.25" amma.

: His shiur was 27g, by weight. About one ounce, or one machine mazzah. No
: matter how you crumble it.

I therefore have no idea what was meant by the post that gave a k'zayis in
grams. Unless R' Naeh actually did all of the above, and was being specific
about matzah.

Air has mass, and a full balloon weighs more than an empty one. The crumbled
version may include more or less air than the non-crumbled one, depending
on packing.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for  4-Apr-00: Shelishi, Sazria
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Rosh-Hashanah 19b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         


Go to top.

Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 10:20:15 -0400
From: Gil.Student@citicorp.com
Subject:
Re: Rav Herszog


C/H Luntz wrote:

>>I can't find him dealing with the Taz explicitly (do you have a cite, BTW), 
but in his general discusion he brings the gemorra in Yevamos (90a-b) regarding 
the power of Chazal to make takanot forbidding one to carry out a positive Torah
mitzvah (eg taking lulav or blowing shofer) in a situation where it is a shav 
v'al ta'aseh (inter alia, he quotes the Ran in Sukkah 42b on this point).  If 
one agrees that Chazal has the power to forbid people to carry out a mitzvah, 
then I would have thought that a mere reshus was reasonably obvious (how does 
the Taz deal with this gemorra?)>>


I tried looking for the Taz but it wasn't where I thought it was.  I'll keep 
looking.  I've heard it quoted so man times that it must exist.

What the Taz asks was why a bris milah on Shabbos is not rabbinically prohibited
like shofar, lulav, etc.  He answers that since the Torah specifically permitted
it ("Uvayom hashemini" - afilu beshabbos) Chazal do not have the power to 
prohibit it.  Shofar etc. does not have a specific passuk saying that it is 
permissible on Shabbos so Chazal had the ability to prohibit them.

Gil Student
gil.student@citicorp.com


Go to top.

Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 14:17:11 -0400
From: "Noah Witty" <nwitty@ix.netcom.com>
Subject:
Marror and horseradish


See article in Gesher 5741 by Arthur Schaffer, a botanist.  (Any lapses in
the following precis are mine and not Schaffer's) Argues that use of
horseradish was accomodation to galus (actual theme of article is that uses
of various vegetables sanctioned as marror reflect Jewish diasporas over the
centuries).

Makes distinction btwn bitter and sharp and on that basis notes that
horseradish is sharp, while the leafy ones are +ACI-mar+ACI-, bitter.  On that basis
explains why the mishna prefers the leafy lettuces for marror that tend to
bitter (btw, ever leave a celery too long? wow: BITTER, not sharp.)

Also, horseradish was never originally sanctioned: it was +ACI-mare retisch+ACI-(+ACE-)
Latin for +ACo-sea+ACo- radish, because it grew near lakes, etc.  Mare took on Anglo
pronounciation and changed the vegetable.

It follows from the above that horseradish may not even be one of the five
allowed by the mishna and if that's all you eat you might not fulfill the
Rabbinic obligation of eating marror on Pesach night.

(Parenthetically, R' Hershel Schachter has suggested that marror was a leafy
vegetable based on simple meaning of words: Korech means to wrap: you can't
wrap a matzah--unless soggy. . .--around anything, but if Korech means to
take a leafy veggy and wrap +ACo-it+ACo- around the matzah, then we've got something
plausible.)

Of course, virtually anyone I've told this to dismisses it as flying in the
face of minhag, gdolim ve-rabbim, etc.--notwithstanding that if the argument
is true, the minhag of using horseradish is total Ta'us.

NW


Go to top.

Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 13:23:11 -0500
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
Subject:
Re: Dor Revi'i (monetary sacrifice to avoid transgression)


I'm unconfortable with a thread that teeters on insulting a chaver's ancestor
and the kavod of a notable rav. I'll let it continue assuming that people
watch their language to avoid such insult. That said...

The Dor Revi'i (whom I know of only through Avodah) appears to have had a
da'as yachid on a number of matters. As such, giving an answer based upon
his reasoning may explain his position, but on these issues it won't explain
that of the rabim. IOW, we still need to know why the rest of gedolei
Yisrael say what they do -- particularly, for each of us, those gedolei
Yisrael that particular chaveir tends to follow.

So, while Eilu va'Eilu applies, most of us are still left with the question,
being amongst the "va'Eilu".

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for  4-Apr-00: Shelishi, Sazria
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Rosh-Hashanah 19b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         


Go to top.

Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 14:07:55 -0400
From: "Daniel B. Schwartz" <SCHWARTZESQ@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject:
Re: Ruchani Eye on Rabbi Ovadaih Yosef, shlita


The politcal fallout aside, I have one very basic question; are Rabbis, no
matter how great in stature, above the law?  Was there a Halachik mandate
for ROY to speak as he did?  Was there no other way, (i.e. one which would
not have resulted in this investigation/new culturkampf) for him to have
expressed his views?  If we will defend ROY simpy on the grounds that he is
a gadol beYisrael and for no other reason, then  we are then treading
precariously down a slippery slope.  Shall we then defend and stand by those
most admirable mosdos, operating with the haskama of gedolim that commit tax
fraud?  Shall we signal our approval for those thugs who kidnap and beat men
who do not give their wives gittin (and do so at the behest of batei din and
dayanim)?  If ROY, a citizen of Israel, broke the law by means of what he
said, then he should answer for it.  I think that "Chachamim hizharu
bedivreichem. . ." is ever appropos.

----- Original Message -----
From: Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer
<sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>
To: Avodah <avodah@aishdas.org>
Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2000 1:36 PM
Subject: Fw: Ruchani Eye on Rabbi Ovadaih Yosef, shlita


This is some unsolicited e-mail I receive, and, to be honest, do not
normally read. But since it, too, concerns proper perspective on ROY's
public comments, it caught my eye this time.

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

----- Original Message -----
From: <ABZadok@aol.com>
To: <ABZadok@aol.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2000 9:45 AM
Subject: Ruchani Eye on Rabbi Ovadaih Yosef, shlita


> B"H
> 28 Adar 2, 5760 - 4 April 2000
>
> A Ruchani Eye on Israel
> A Service of the Panu Derekh On-Line Journal for Torah Spirituality
> Brought to you by Yeshivat Benei N'vi'im
> Visit us at www.koshertorah.com
>
> Purim & Pesah - It Sure Is A Time Of Miracles
> Follow-up & Commentary on the Investigation of Rabbi Ovadiah Yosef
>
> According to a feature in the Jerusalem Post On Line edition (dated 4
April
> 2000), the Police investigation of Rabbi Ovadiah Yosef is having a
> dramatically positive effect!  It appears that many sectors of the
Ashkenazi
> Haredi world are rallying around Rav Ovadiah in support of him.  The
Agudat
> Yisrael and even the Edah HaHaredit, a known non-supporter of Rav Ovadiah
is
> making its presence known in support of the Rav.


Go to top.

Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 14:56:35 EDT
From: Joelirich@aol.com
Subject:
Re: Ruchani Eye on Rabbi Ovadaih Yosef, shlita


In a message dated 4/4/00 2:28:19 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
SCHWARTZESQ@WORLDNET.ATT.NET writes:

<<  If ROY, a citizen of Israel, broke the law by means of what he
 said, then he should answer for it.  I think that "Chachamim hizharu
 bedivreichem. . ." is ever appropos. >>
I would certainly learn a lot from an explanation of why ROY felt his 
approach was correct. Forgetting about our debates over emunat chachamim etc. 
, let me take a moment to explain how a restless soul might react to these 
events.  The first reaction might  be consternation at remarks that on the 
face of them seem inconsistent with how we generally treat others.  The 
second reaction is to be kafuf to a gadol and say "he must have his halachik 
reasons".  The third reaction might be "how can I learn from this for myself 
(or explain to others who look to me for guidance) if all I'm told is trust 
me, he has his reasons"

Kol Tuv,
Joel Rich


Go to top.

Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 21:26:27 +0300
From: D & E-H Bannett <dbnet@barak-online.net>
Subject:
Re:shi'urim craze


R' Akiva Atwood's question:

>Why wouldn't suffek D'orisa L'Chumra apply to the shiur of matzo?

Was followed by: 

>A reality check a day keeps 
>the delusions at bay (Gila Atwood)

Was he answering his own question? -:)

Or, a bit more seriously, while the large size shiurim have valid halakhic arguments 
based on what unit is considered the base from which the others are calculated, 
discrepancies between the kli for challah and size of eggs or thumbs, etc., isn't there 
a need for reality.  Any shiur for eating has to be based also on the size of the mouth 
and throat.  I described the Hatam Sofer's shita in my last posting not to show how 
machmir he was but to point out that he could not have carried out his shita if he 
used the new large shiurim because it is physically impossible.

It also seems necessary to me that the size of a kazayit should have some 
connection with the size of an olive. Let us not take an average olive, but the largest 
jumbo olive that modern agriculture has developed. If we take a sphere of 2 cm 
diameter (0.833"), it would take 6-1/2 of them to get the volume of the 27 cc shiur.  R' 
Hayyim Volozhiner's shiur is the size of the olive of his time.  It would take nine of his 
shiur of 3 cc to get to 27 cc.  How many zeitim in a kazayit? Is this reality? Or perhaps 
it only requires a teirutz of nitkatnu hazeitim to make it reality.

List members must have noticed that I love to tell stories in my postings. Here's 
another. Some years ago three Michlala girls visited us and my wife served juice and 
some whole-wheat crackers and spreads to put on them.  One of the girls 
immediately pointed out that, if they ate three crackers, they would have to make a 
motzi as this is kevi'at seudah.  I asked what size kazayit they used at the seder and 
they said one whole machine matza.  So, one whole matza is a kazayit but one little 
whole-wheat cracker with perhaps a tenth of the matza's volume is a k'beitza 
(assuming 3 beitzim as kovea' seudah).  Without going into whether a beitza is two, 
three or another number of zeitim, and even though we are comparing a d'oraita with 
a d'rabbanan, isn't the safety factor of at least 20:1 a bit exaggerated even if, in this 
case, not physically impossible? 

BTW, some years ago, a neighbor more modern than me choked while trying to 
gobble the two modern k'zeitim while watching the clock. Luckily, he  managed to get 
it down just before someone ran for the car to rush him to the hospital.

R"Akiva then continues:

>according to my LOR, the Chazon Ish's 17cc shiur was for d'Rabbanim >shiurim.

R' H. Kanievsky was talking about what he saw at the seder not what is written in 
Kuntres Hashiurim. I don't have the source before me, but I feel certain he was talking 
of the motzi and not the maror sandwich.

Pesach kasher ve-sameach to all, and, please, without choking,

David


Go to top.

Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 14:52:14 -0500
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
Subject:
Re: shi'urim craze


On Tue, Apr 04, 2000 at 09:26:27PM +0300, D & E-H Bannett wrote:
: It also seems necessary to me that the size of a kazayit should have some 
: connection with the size of an olive. Let us not take an average olive, but
: the largest jumbo olive that modern agriculture has developed.

Let us take the size of an olive in the days of the meraglim. The current
ratio of grape size to olive size is roughly 1-1/4. Now, how large was a
grape again? <grin>

Seriously, though, you need to prove your assumption -- that we're using
contemporary measure, or that "the largest jumbo olive that modern agriculture
has developed" is at least as large as the appropriate historical one. The
assumption of the CI is that it isn't.

I could see achilah being defined by contemporary sizes. I could even see
rationalizing it. But more useful would be to know R' Chaim Vilozhiner's
reasoning -- not mine.

: BTW, some years ago, a neighbor more modern than me choked while trying to 
: gobble the two modern k'zeitim while watching the clock. Luckily, he
: managed to get it down just before someone ran for the car to rush him to
: the hospital.

I also commented that our large shiurim teeter on the edge of kulah in
defining achilah gasa. I don't think the pikuach nefesh aspect is shechiach
though, despite your anecdotal evidence.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for  4-Apr-00: Shelishi, Sazria
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Rosh-Hashanah 19b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         


Go to top.

Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 14:55:05 -0500
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
Subject:
Re: Shiurim


On Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 12:55:08PM -0400, Edward Weidberg wrote:
: In any event, having a conflicting taste is worse than having no taste
: at all-- bola matza u'maror, yedai matza yatza, but chewing them
: together is worse-- see MB 475:31 and Pesachim 115b  Tosfos D"H Yedai
: Matza.

Note to those who question the use of horseradish and therefore use a k'zayis
of something else and put just a bit of horseradish in for nostalgia, or
for it to feel like maror, or whatever...

If you are arguing that horseradish isn't maror, then you are drowning out
the taste of the real maror.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for  4-Apr-00: Shelishi, Sazria
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Rosh-Hashanah 19b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         


Go to top.

Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 15:17:15 -0500
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
Subject:
Re: Packing peanuts, chometz, and quote of the Ari zl


On Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 12:32:54PM -0400, Ben Rothke wrote:
: Which segues into the comment of the Ari z"l that nearly every Rav and 
: Peasach sefer quote this time of year:
: Anyone who removes all chometz from their house is assured of having a year 
: without sin.

: While I am not versed in the writings of the Ari z"l, such a statement, is 
: LAD  in no way referring to the physical chomotz, it is clearly referring to 
: the chomentz we carry around in our neshamas.
....
: So how do we put more emphasis on the real bitul ha'chometz and less time on 
: packing peanuts?

So, to begin with: define "spiritual chameitz".

Some ideas:

Pulling directly from what chameitz is, we get notions of ga'avah in that it
is inflated (like gasas haru'ach), and of a lack of zerizus.

But looking at chameitz as the antonym of matza, we only covered two of
numerous basis. There is "lechem oni" in the sense of aniyus (a good antonym to
gasas haru'ach) -- the matzah of mitzrayim. And the matzah of the yetziah
"vayei'ofu es habatzik ki lo hichmitz" -- leaving bizrizus.

There is also the obligatory matzah of the night before the yetzi'ah, "chok
olam lidoroseichem". An unquestioning obedience to chok.

And last (that I could think of) the matzah of lidoros, the lechem oni
"she'onim alav divarim harbei". "... vilo yir'eh licha chameitz vilo yir'eh
lichah se'or bichol gevulechah. Vihigadta livincha bayom hahu leimor..."
This, unlike the chok, is an invitation for explanation.

In sum, chameitz could represent:
1- Egotism
2- Procrastination
3- A lack of obedience
4- Rote without thought, or maybe without teaching others. It's unclear
   whether it's an issue of lilmod (answering one own's questions) or lilameid
   (vihigadta livincha in particular). Or both.

What do all have in common?

Well, we can lump 1,2, and three together causally. Ego causes a lack of
obedience, of which procrastination is a common avoidance mechanism. Getting
#4 into the picture is harder.

They may all respresent various flaws in the ruach, but that would require
exploring various opinions for defining Naran and what ruach means to each.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for  4-Apr-00: Shelishi, Sazria
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Rosh-Hashanah 19b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         


Go to top.

Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 14:14:33 -0700
From: Jacob Klerman <klerman@rand.org>
Subject:
Penkower on kriyah


More than occasionally on this list there are citations to "Penkower" on
issues of kriyah.  Can someone give me a full citation?  Publisher?
Title?  Is the book still in print?  Where can I get it?
Perhaps reply to me off list.
Yaakov Klerman


Go to top.

Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 22:58:37 +0100
From: Chana/Heather Luntz <Chana/Heather@luntz.demon.co.uk>
Subject:
Re: Rav Herszog


In message <H00013ad05cdbfbf@MHS>, Gil.Student@citicorp.com writes
>C/H Luntz wrote:
>
>>>I can't find him dealing with the Taz explicitly (do you have a cite, BTW), 
>but in his general discusion he brings the gemorra in Yevamos (90a-b) regarding 
>the power of Chazal to make takanot forbidding one to carry out a positive Torah
>mitzvah (eg taking lulav or blowing shofer) in a situation where it is a shav 
>v'al ta'aseh (inter alia, he quotes the Ran in Sukkah 42b on this point).  If 
>one agrees that Chazal has the power to forbid people to carry out a mitzvah, 
>then I would have thought that a mere reshus was reasonably obvious (how does 
>the Taz deal with this gemorra?)>>
>
>
>I tried looking for the Taz but it wasn't where I thought it was.  I'll keep 
>looking.  I've heard it quoted so man times that it must exist.
>
>What the Taz asks was why a bris milah on Shabbos is not rabbinically prohibited
>like shofar, lulav, etc.  He answers that since the Torah specifically permitted
>it ("Uvayom hashemini" - afilu beshabbos) Chazal do not have the power to 
>prohibit it.  Shofar etc. does not have a specific passuk saying that it is 
>permissible on Shabbos so Chazal had the ability to prohibit them.
>

I am familiar with this argument (although as with you, I am not sure
where to find it inside, and could not even have quoted it in the name
of the Taz).

However my understanding of the difference was that, in the case of a
bris milah on shabbas, the pasuk specifically *required* (ie not just
permitted, but required) it to be done on shabbas, by way of this drasha
- where as there is no equivalent pasuk for Shofar that requires that it
be blown on shabbas.

If we understand it that way, then Rav Hertzog's answer is poshut (and
does not need to be stated).  Nowhere in the Torah does it *require* a
father to marry off his minor daughter (if it did, I suspect a number of
people on Avodah would have failed to fulfil this mitzvah - as many of
the men on here have, or have had, minor daughters whom they have
singularly failed to marry off).  Hence there is no problem with a
takana prohibiting a father from doing so.

>Gil Student
>gil.student@citicorp.com
>

Kind Regards

Chana

-- 
Chana/Heather Luntz


Go to top.

Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 18:29:21 EDT
From: Tobrr111@aol.com
Subject:
Bach, Dor Rivii and Spending all ones money


I am sorry. The Bach I mentioned is in end of Orach Chayim 656, not 658.


Go to top.

Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 20:39:38 EDT
From: EMPreil@aol.com
Subject:
Re: Letters in the Torah


In a message dated 4/3/00 3:18:24 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
owner-avodah@aishdas.org writes:

> I also frequently read of the 600,000 letters in Torah, and yet also that
>  there are approximately 308K letters in Torah.  While the 600K may be a
>  metaphor (?), most references to this 600K number do not mention that it is
>  so.
>  
>  Can someone shed light on this, too?

R. Mordechai Kornfeld had a Parasha Page essay on this topic a few years ago. 
 I suspect it is available on line in his archives.

Hope this helps,
Elozor


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 >