Avodah Mailing List

Volume 23: Number 127

Wed, 30 May 2007

< Previous Next >
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Message: 1
From: "Yisrael Medad" <yisrael.medad@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 22:47:07 +0300
[Avodah] Har Habayit

The Hebrew Wiki entry for the location of the Bet Mikdash within the
contemporary Har Habayit

Yisrael Medad
Mobile Post Efraim 44830
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070529/009d9ae5/attachment-0001.html 

Go to top.

Message: 2
From: "Micha Berger" <micha@aishdas.org>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 17:29:51 -0400 (EDT)
Re: [Avodah] yishuv EY

On Sun, May 27, 2007 10:45 am, R Mike Miller wrote:
: One should not refrain from one mitzvah just because of other aveiros.
: Should one who knows he may not be able to keep shabbos day perfectly
: not make kiddush at night?

Time differs from space in that you have more volition over your
motion in space than in time.

A person who lacks self control can not choose whether or not to enter
Shabbos. His chillul Shabbos can't be fixed until his zehirus or
ta'avah is. However, chilul ha'aretz can also be avoided by being

Not saying any of the above because it's my derekh. However, when
someone posts about a derekh haTorah that they find themselves
entirely unable to relate, I see that as a challenge.

Tir'u baTov!

Micha Berger             Spirituality is like a bird: if you tighten
micha@aishdas.org        your grip on it, it chokes; slacken your grip,
http://www.aishdas.org   and it flies away.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            - Rav Yisrael Salanter

Go to top.

Message: 3
From: "Micha Berger" <micha@aishdas.org>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 17:38:47 -0400 (EDT)
Re: [Avodah] Wording of Kaddish

On Tue, May 22, 2007 1:38 pm, Arie Folger wrote:
: RMB then wrote:
:> As far as I know, c and d are errors caused by (a). IOW, someone is
:> about to give some reason I never heard for them.

: Beme'hilat kevod toratkha, it isn't obvious that c and d are errors. I
: would argue the opposite....

No need for mechilah. I stated my certainty that someone would point
out that I don't know far enough.

However, I do not understand your response:
: If the Gra's explanation requires the change which the
: Mishnah Verurah suggests ..., then, we should be consisten and apply
: the correction accross the board...

Why? The idea behind the change is specific to the pair of words
"yisgadal vayisqadash". The later "tisqabal" isn't an idiom whose
origin in nevu'ah warrants being pointed to by a shift in language.

: Eh, but as RAB pointed out (mentioned in RMB's post I am replying to),
: the Gra probably didn't say what some rightly highly respected others
: have theorized he did.

I am perfectly fine assuming that when the Gra's talmidim argue about
what he did and give diqduq reasons for their tzedadim, that the
difference actually comes from the rebbe. Yes, it could be a
post-facto explanation by the talmidim. I would agree it's not
muchrach, merely an assumption.

But behind that assumption:
(1) Why would it matter to R' Chaim Vilozhiner so much that the seifer
had it wrong?
(2) Is it /that/ less powerful of an argument besheim RCV, anyway?

Tir'u baTov!

Micha Berger             Spirituality is like a bird: if you tighten
micha@aishdas.org        your grip on it, it chokes; slacken your grip,
http://www.aishdas.org   and it flies away.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            - Rav Yisrael Salanter

Go to top.

Message: 4
From: "Micha Berger" <micha@aishdas.org>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 17:48:59 -0400 (EDT)
Re: [Avodah] kashrus of milk

On Tue, May 22, 2007 1:35 pm, Rich, R Joel wrote:
: I don't understand the above statement - the number of cows involved
: has nothing to do with the probability of treifot unless you have
: greater knowledge.  And if this statement is correct, and Micha's
: numbers are correct, then even without this DA stuff you have a ratio
: worse than 1/60 in most cases so it would seem that each
: country/state/farm(?) would have to do a test to see if their herds are
: at the 1/60 level
: (or back to the MRI/ben pakua herds)

Numbers I find in a Google aren't really mine.

Howevber, those numbers were the percentage who get DA. Of those,
those healthy enough for surgery are operated on and thereby are
tereifos. The farming web site I found didn't give statistics for
other forms of tereifos. It merely established the likelihood that
more than 1:60 are tereifos because of DA surgery. If 1:60 is a
meaningful measure,

However, I see this case not as one of straight bitul, but of the
machloqes about whether the odds of the components of a ta'aroves add
back together. If so, then according to the Rash, the mixed milk would
be decided by the combined odds of each of the cows involved. But even
according to the Rash would be rov, not bitul beshishim.

And then add to that the question of whether the Rash would even be
machmir by a ruba deleisa leqaman. The case of the ta'aroves was where
the set including the cheilev was reconstituted and eaten. By a leisa
leqaman, there is no such set.

Tir'u baTov!

Micha Berger             Spirituality is like a bird: if you tighten
micha@aishdas.org        your grip on it, it chokes; slacken your grip,
http://www.aishdas.org   and it flies away.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            - Rav Yisrael Salanter

Go to top.

Message: 5
From: "Yisrael Medad" <yisrael.medad@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 23:35:44 +0300
[Avodah] Har Habayit

The Rambam's approach, and he entered the compound

Yisrael Medad
Mobile Post Efraim 44830
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070529/80c78637/attachment.htm 

Go to top.

Message: 6
From: "Eli Turkel" <eliturkel@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 22:08:25 +0200
[Avodah] har habayit

<As I don't have Rav Goren's book with me at the office, I can't give his
exact figures but he lays out about seven different shitot to illustrate how
the Bet HaMikdash could be fitted into the Temple Mount and, just as the
Mishna has it, Middot 2:1, the most expanisve 'clear' area is on the south,
followed by the east, north and west where it becomes the narrowest.
Nevertheless, there is room outside of the 500 square cubit.  >

I dont have R. Goren's sefer but I tend to doubt he used the CI shiur
for the amah.

I found several articles in techumum on the place of the Temple.
1. In 14:437-472 and 23:517-544 and again in 25:514 542 Toviah Sagiv (an
argues for a southern location of the Temple. In particular the present
southern and eastern walls of the Temple mount were the borders of the
halachic har habayit.
(doesnt seem to fit the description given by Medad above)
In particular he decides (vol 23) that according to the Radvaz one
cannot eneter anywhere on the Temple mount but only in houses and roofs
overlooking the mount on the east or north

2. In 16:458-502 discusses various possibilities and various shitot
for the Amah. He rejects CI (Chatam Sofer is even bigger!) as completely
impossible to fit in the present walls. He also rejects an amah of
44cm and is left with 52cm or 48cm.
He accepts the eastern wall as a boundary of the 500 amot area but not the
southern wall with kodash hakadoshim on the rock.

If we were to consider both these possibilities there is almost no place
left on the Temple mount that is certainly not in the 500 square har
Furthermore if one accepts the CI of amah=58cm there is a little space on
the south, nothing on the east or west and most on the north
(see picture 5 on p487)

I am not capable of making any decisions between these opinions.
But it seems that each shitah has its problems.
Again I personally find the shiur of CI quite impossible for many reasons.
However, for those that do accept it there is really no place to walk around
except entering from the south (not presently an option) and staying near
shaarei chulda.

Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070529/318e3694/attachment.html 

Go to top.

Message: 7
From: Minden <phminden@arcor.de>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 11:40:49 +0200
Re: [Avodah] Ashkenazic Pronunciation of "HaShem"

> How did those Ashkenazim who don't normally use Israeli pronunciation come to pronounce the last syllable of "HaShem" as a segol and not a tzeire?

It's in a closed syllable, where in most cases you don't have a difference between segol and tzeire. I think in closed syllables, tzeire was never diphthongised in Ashkenazzi Hebrew except in the most formal stratum, that is in laaying, and even there I'm not sure it's older than 150 or years.

There are exceptions even in non-formal environments like with Hebrew everyday words in Yiddish, where there *is* a diphthong for some reason. These exceptions concern words like 'chein' (never "chenn"), for instance.

Lipman Phillip Minden

Go to top.

Message: 8
From: Minden <phminden@arcor.de>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 11:45:00 +0200
Re: [Avodah] [Areivim] shelo osani ...

> "Hamaqom yenakheim eskhem/[o]skha/eskhen/osakh"

Why oskha and not osakh (m.)? Is oskha even a word (of the same language that uses 'hamaqom' for God)?

Lipman Phillip Minden

Go to top.

Message: 9
From: "Shoshana L. Boublil" <toramada@bezeqint.net>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 16:40:45 +0300
[Avodah] birds-eye view of the Temple mount

The following website has information and answers to questions asked on this 
forum, including discussion of some of the shitot and a map showing where 
people walk today vs. where the Temple itself is located.


Shoshana L. Boublil 

Go to top.

Message: 10
From: "SBA" <sba@sba2.com>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 00:32:01 +1000
Re: [Avodah] yishuv EY

From: "Daniel Israel" <dmi1@hushmail.com>

>>>Should one who knows he may not be able to keep shabbos day
>>>perfectly not make kiddush at night?

SBA wrote:  >Maybe your question should be:
>"Should (or can) one who knows he may not be able to keep shabbos
>day perfectly - be motzi others with kiddush at night?"

DI: Do you have a source to say he can't (or shouldn't)?

SBA: Seeing that a mechalel Shabbos has a din Akum lechol davar,
I doubt there is a posek who says one be be yotze with an Akum's kiddush.

(And, BTW, by know about Shabbos and making Kiddush, it eliminates any
 likelihood of depicting him as a Tinok Shenishba [for those who are 
normally inclined to argue on behalf of mechalelei shabbos.]

SBA (old): Hopefully he uses yayin mevushal...

DI: I assume this is a joke

SBA: Yep, as in 'a bittereh gelechter'.

DI: but I have wondered about it.  Does anyone know a source that discusses
this issue?  Do we say that since ta'amim for the gezeriah are not relevant
 (is he really choshesh that he  himself did AZ) he can drink it?

SBA: Taam? Gezeirah?
AFAIK, no one claims that a mechalel Shabbos is an oved AZ.
The halocho is simply  that 'dinoy keAkum lechol davar'.


Go to top.

Message: 11
From: "SBA" <sba@sba2.com>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 00:32:52 +1000
Re: [Avodah] yishuv EY

From: mkopinsky@gmail.com
> Amongst others it cites the Ramban (one of the main sources for of Mitzvas
> Yishuv EY bizman hazeh) on 'Vatitma Haaretz" (end of Parshas Achrei) and
> in Parshas Vayera on 'Vaneida osom', that sinning in EY is far, far worse
> than doing so in Chu'L.

The fact that sinning in EY is worse than sinning in Chu"l does not
necessarily mean that if one will sin at all one shouldn't make Aliyah.

>>Rav Leff writes: "   The learned and G-d
fearing individual knows that Eretz Yisroel is the "palace of the King." A
higher, more exacting standard of behavior is demanded here. One might
reason that he should not introduce himself into a situation that may
demand more of him spiritually than he can deliver.  He may therefore opt
to remain in chutz laAretz rather than to abuse the sanctity of the Land.
(Such logic might have validity for a Jew absolutely uninterested in Torah
and mitzvos. In chutz laAretz, his transgressions would be less

absolutely uninterested in Torah and mitzvos."


Go to top.

Message: 12
From: "Rich, Joel" <JRich@sibson.com>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 11:43:07 -0400
[Avodah] Baal Nefesh

I've been doing some research on this for a group I learn with. I
noticed that while the gemara uses it sparingly (4 times or so) Rashi
defines it as chassid which is used with much greater frequency. This
got me to thinking as to why the gemara would use 2 terms for the same
concept (if indeed this is the case). Any derech to an insight or an
actual insight would be appreciated.
Joel Rich
distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 
strictly prohibited.  If you received this message in error, please notify us 
immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message.  
Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070530/d858f50b/attachment.htm 

Go to top.

Message: 13
From: "SBA" <sba@sba2.com>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 02:51:30 +1000
Re: [Avodah] yishuv EY

From: Eli Turkel
SBA: He has sources saying that baalei aveireh SHOULD be oleh to EY?
I suggest reading the writings of R. Kook Senior & Junior on the importance
of the contributions of the chilonim to yishuv EY.

So, how do they explain the posuk 'vatovou vatetamu es artzi' ?

>>. While of course neither denies the importance of
mitzvot in building EY both express their hakorat hatov to those
that actually built the land with their physical labor

I can understand that.
And so, no doubt we should have similar hakoras hatov for today's
physical laborers, eg, Arabs, Thais and Romanians etc, who continue
 to build the land for us - decades after the chilonim have given up
on this hard slog.

>>The difference is that the talmidim of the SR are mainly in NY state while
>>those of R. Kook are in Yerushalayim. The influence of the various
SR on Israeli thought is nil even within the charedi political parties.

And that makes R. Kook's views 'mainstream'???

In anycase, I doubt  if Satmar and its 'satellites' (who are not only
 in NY state, but in all major Jewish centres - and indeed in EY),
 have any less influence than do the talmidim of R Kook.

Who do you think has more 'influence' in EY, Satmar's 'partners' the Edah
Hacharedis or Merkaz Harav?

Whose rabonim pasken more shaalos and who produces more poskim?

And whenever there are attacks on Torah in EY, who has won more of
these battles - Satmar (I am using that as a generic term for most of
the charedi world) or the Talmidim of RK?

>> SBA thinks Satmar is mainstream because he quotes the Sheloh etc.
>> By mainstream I mean today's mainstream. How many yeshivot in EY learn
>> VM and how many learn the thoughts of R. Kook and RYBS?

First of all, I never claimed that Satmar is mainstream.
You were the one who first mentioned that term:
>>From: Eli Turkel  > In spite of SBA, Satmar is not mainstream psak.<<

My response to that was
>>Mainstream, shmainstream, looking inside the Vayoel Moshe
(pages 236-242) it is quite obvious that this has nothing to do with the
Rebbe's personal psak.<<

I was simply pointing out that the psak of the VM regarding baalei
aveireh making aliyah - is backed by the poskim.


Go to top.

Message: 14
From: "SBA" <sba@sba2.com>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 02:57:26 +1000
[Avodah] Fw: R' Unna: psak or hetter?

From: "Chaim G Steinmetz"
 R' Unna's teshuvah on girls'choral groups is now available on
>> http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/shoalin.pdf
> In that tshuva he forbids kol isha of an ervah, .. - says there is no 
chiyuv macho'oh concerning) girls that are not ervah.
> I fail to see how this tshuvah helps concerning opera etc. 
 In addition, according to many nida is also considered ervah 
which would cause a problem even concerning single
> Jewish girls.  (SBA old: The MB 75:17 says this - beshem Achronim.)

And even R. Unna, whilst for some reason, overlooking the nidah problem,
(at least legabei chiyuv of machoeh), writes "lo yimche bifresiyeh
 ki yesh lochush bizman hazeh sheyilaagu alav.." 

Thus his reasoning for this psak is  because 'yilaagu alav' - obviously 
realising that the community of the questioner would have 
disregarded any such machoeh.

Had his psak - which some here have used as a basis for a
 'hetter'  for kol isha - been universal and lekatchilah, there would 
be no reason for him to add those words.

And even so, he is talking about a machoeh 'bifresyieh', implying that 
privately a machoeh may indeed be in place.



Avodah mailing list

End of Avodah Digest, Vol 23, Issue 127

Send Avodah mailing list submissions to

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to

You can reach the person managing the list at

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Avodah digest..."

< Previous Next >