Avodah Mailing List

Volume 28: Number 179

Thu, 01 Sep 2011

• 1. Re: sun and moon (Arie Folger)
• 2. Re: sun and moon (D&E-H Bannett)
• 3. Shabbos King (Micha Berger)
• 4. lecha dodi-eli tzion (Saul.Z.New...@kp.org)
• 5. r yosi ben kisma (Saul.Z.New...@kp.org)
• 6. Re: Shabbos King (Akiva Blum)
• 7. Re: Shelo Asani Isha (Micha Berger)
• 8. Re: lecha dodi-eli tzion (menucha)
• 9. sun and moon, hydrogen, etc. (Simi Peters)
• 10. Re: Shelo Asani Isha (Micha Berger)
• 11. Re: sun and moon, hydrogen, etc. (Micha Berger)
• 12. Re: sun and moon, hydrogen, etc. (Hankman)
• 13. Wetting and Rolling Rice paper on Shabbat (Esther and Aryeh Frimer)
• 14. O vs pharisee (Saul.Z.New...@kp.org)
• 15. Re: O vs pharisee (Lisa Liel)
• 16. Re: O vs pharisee (Zev Sero)
• 17. Shelo Asani Ishah (Eliezer)
• 18. Modern-day essurai, etc. (Garry)
• 19. Rav Moshe Feinstein: Choosing A Frum Doctor? (Prof. Levine)

RZS wrote:
> When a prince transforms into a frog, is he not the same prince afterwards?

Princes do not turn into frogs, and the Midrashim are not Disney
animated features or fairy tales (unless you want to be darshen the
fairy tales to mine them for moral import; some of them, after all,
are based on wisdom literature, sometimes even lifted out of the
Midrash).

-- 
Arie Folger,
Recent blog posts on http://ariefolger.wordpress.com/
* Rabbi, wie stehen Sie zur Ein?scherung?
* Biblical Advice for the Internet Age iii
* Speaking To Your Kids About Personal Safety
* Chance Favors the Concentration of Wealth, Study Shows - What's
Torah's Alternative?
* Biblical Advice for the Internet Age ii
* The Ecologically Correct Funeral
* The Goodly Tents of Jacob
* Biblical Advice for the Internet Age

Re: G"M Lisa's remark <<Pardon?  I believe it's Shabbat 
HaMalka.  Not Shabbat HaMelech.>>

As Lisa doesn't feel  right when called R' or Rn and the 
list feels it proper to use a title, I called her G"M which 
stands for Geveret M'khubedet.

I hope it does not make any staunch feminist on the list 
feel downgraded, but the Rambam, in Hilkhot Shabbat 30 
Halakha 2, uses the term Shabbat Hamelekh.  He does not 
mention Shabbat Hamalka in Mishne Torah


David

On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 11:17:04AM +0300, D&E-H Bannett wrote:
> I hope it does not make any staunch feminist on the list feel downgraded, 
> but the Rambam, in Hilkhot Shabbat 30 Halakha 2, uses the term Shabbat 
> Hamelekh.  He does not mention Shabbat Hamalka in Mishne Torah

I would like to propose that it rests on whether one has our girsa in
Shabbos 119a of "Shabbos haMalkah", with a hei, or whether R' Chanina is
taken as speaking of "Shabbos haMalka", with an alef. Although perhaps
the Rambam's girsa was further from ours, since the rest of R' Chanina's
quote "Bo'u veneitzi liqeras Shabbos haMalkah" is Hebrew more than Aramaic
-- Aramaic would be "asyon unefaqon" (diqduq?) not "bo'u veneitzei".

In any case, is this a da'as yachid of the Rambam? As I already noted,
it's certainly not what reaches us in the zemiros.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Spirituality is like a bird: if you tighten
mi...@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

how prevalent , if at all , is the practice of singing  lecha dodi to that 
melody on shabbat chazon?
i assume it's not done in chassidish, but does anyone else yet do it?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110829/2931567e/attachment-0001.htm>

http://rechovot.blogspot.com/2011/08/rabbi-yosi-ben-kisma-and-ou
t-of-town.html


.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110829/dddde595/attachment-0001.htm>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: avodah-boun...@lists.aishdas.org [mailto:avodah-
> boun...@lists.aishdas.org] On Behalf Of Micha Berger
> Sent: Monday, 29 August, 2011 12:47 PM
> 
> I would like to propose that it rests on whether one has our girsa in
> Shabbos 119a of "Shabbos haMalkah", with a hei, or whether R' Chanina
> is
> taken as speaking of "Shabbos haMalka", with an alef. Although perhaps
> the Rambam's girsa was further from ours, since the rest of R'
> Chanina's
> quote "Bo'u veneitzi liqeras Shabbos haMalkah" is Hebrew more than
> Aramaic
> -- Aramaic would be "asyon unefaqon" (diqduq?) not "bo'u veneitzei".
> 

Yet the Gemore Bava Kama 32b says Bo'u venetzei likras Kalla Malkeso.

Akiva

On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 12:41:55PM +0300, R Aryeh Frimer wrote:
: In Nefesh Harav, p. 107, Rav Hershel Schechter writes that the Rav
: said sheLo asani nochri (instead of goy). Dr. Arnie Lustiger cites
: this in his Mesoret HaRav Yamim Noraim Mahzorim. The Rav Davened quite
: loudly. If he regularly said SheAsani Yisrael, people would have known
: and publicized it.

As I noted, the Perushim also say "shelo asani nochri/ah". I am under the
impression that at least some hold this was nusach haGra.

RAFrimer is writing in reference to a claim made by R' Asher Lopatin at
<http://morethodoxy.org/2011/08/25/breaking-news-soloveich
ik-agrees-with-lopatin-accr/>
or <http://bit.ly/rrLDPO>.

As Garnel Ironheart (sorry, I can't put an "R" on a pseudonym, no matter
how much respect I have for the author) notes about the citation RAFrimer
is rebutting
<http://nishmablog.blogspot.c
om/2011/08/shelo-asani-ishah-issue.html?showComment=1314566584190#c58560649
71894207738>:
    Actually I put up a couple of posts on this.

    From a good read of Rabbis Kanefsky and Lopatin it is very clear
    their halachic methodology is based on "I want this answer, therefore
    I will pick and choose those halachic positions I need to prove it
    even if i have to deliberately misunderstand them."

    Indeed Lopatin's most recent post claims the Rav himself is on his
    side when it comes to saying She'asani Yisrael and his proof is a
    letter written to him by a nephew of the Rav who spends the entire
    letter attacking his faulty methodology!
    ...

What RALopatin bases his post on is a quick PS at the end of R' Dr
Yitzchak Zev Soloveitchik's (that's ben R' Moshe ben R' Aharon, ie a
grandnephew of RYBS's) letter:
    P.S. Here's a freebie for you. I believe I have heard from family
    members that the Rov said Shasani Yisrael.

He quotes the letter in full (at the URL given above), but apparently
ignores the main body in which RYZS criticizes that halakhah isn't done
that way.

So, even if we were to trust an "I believe from [other] family members",
an eid mipi eid made with equivocation, over the total silence of his
talmidim and congregants, including multiple minhagei haRav and nusach
haRav type collections, it still wouldn't endorse RALopatin's masqanah.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             "And you shall love H' your G-d with your whole
mi...@aishdas.org        heart, your entire soul, and all you own."
http://www.aishdas.org   Love is not two who look at each other,
Fax: (270) 514-1507      It is two who look in the same direction.

In Camp Moshava (IO) in the 70s it was done (albeit not without those 
who disagreed)
menucha

Saul.Z.New...@kp.org wrote:

>
> how prevalent , if at all , is the practice of singing  lecha dodi to 
> that melody on shabbat chazon?
> i assume it's not done in chassidish, but does anyone else yet do it?
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>Avodah mailing list
>Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
>http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
>  
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110830/8f2c1c6a/attachment-0001.htm>

R' Chaim--

Any attempt to make sense of this midrash scientifically is completely
misconceived; the midrash is not a scientific description of anything--it
is a mashal (which for Hazal means a figurative use of language, allegory,
parable, metaphor, etc.).  For an example of a parshan (a rishon) who
approaches this midrash in non-literal terms, see the Ramban on Bereshit
1:14 (toward the end).	IIRC correctly, Rav Dessler (aharon) has something
non-literal on this too.

Kol tuv,
Simi Peters
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110830/2a831f5b/attachment-0001.htm>

On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 12:02:38AM -0400, Daniel Bukingolts wrote:
: In these types of matters does it even matter whether or not you have a
: minority opinion supporting your stance if the whole point of your stance is
: simply because of modern cultural liberal agendas? Do motives mehind the
: change play a roll at all in respecting or following these decisions?

I feel this reflects a misunderstanding of the dynamic.

For most of the women involved, the feminist reality is a given. E.g. Take
Susan, a hypothetical Managing Director at a large bank, responsible for
dozens of employees. The notion of being a leadership role isn't something
she is trying to impose onto Judaism -- it is part of her life, and now
leaves her feeling a lack in her current mode of observance. Her desire
to have a turn leading a prayer group is from an honest religious hunger.

I am more bothered by something else, and people who were through the
previous iteration can skip down to my reply to RnCL's posts. It hasn't
been that long ago for this to be interesting reading.

What bothers me is the lack of real cheshbon hanefesh. IOW, Susan
the manager's need for more leadership and being in the front in her
religious expression is being treated as a given. It exists, now how do
we fill that need. There is not enough asking whether it is a positive
or unavoidable part of her psyche, or at least neutral, and therefore
/ought/ to be accomodated. Or whether it is a breach from the culture
of the observant community because it stems from a desire we are better
off trying to work to reduce.

I then invoked RHSchachter's understanding of tzeni'us, that tzeni'us is 
what motivates the obligation of a man who is asked to take the amud to
decline the offer. That such being in the limelight something men,
because of our chiyuvim, are forced to do -- to serve the community
even though one is paying a personal price. Not something we are really
supposed to want.

And from this mindset, Susan the MD's attitude is not really one we
should be accomodating, given a choice. Rather we should be educating
ourselves away from it.

And that includes the men who run to take the amud. (For reasons other
than compassion on the gabbaim, who really don't want to have to spend
5 minutes circulating the room looking for a baal shacharis when they
should be saying their own Pesuqei deZimra.) Our error (given how often I
work my running aishdas.org into conversations with people I meet, I have
to include myself) doesn't justify putting more people in that position.

But whether or not you buy into RHS's specific shitah -- and last cycle
those advocating change didn't find it convincing -- I mean it more as
an example to show that issues that make one wonder if this religious
need /should/ be accomodated /do/ exist, and do require addressing as
a precondition to any discussion of what changes are "black letter of
the law" halachically okay.


On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 07:18:53PM +0100, Chana Luntz wrote:
: But in the interests of honesty, it should be clear that in gemora didan, ie
: Menachos 43b, no such explanation is given...

: Menachos 33b-34a
...
: 
: Now leaving aside whether or not the original text here says sheasani
: Yisrael (which in itself is difficult to align with a mitzvah count
: rationale....

I don't know if we can. Because if we're using a different nusach, then
this may be an exception to the rule, a case where we hold like EY over
Bavel. And if so (and this is admittedly a hypothetical I'm raising
for consideration, not an assertion), starting from "gemara didan"
would not be appropriate (in this one case, it's not "didan").

...
: If Rabbi Meir's braisa is quoted correctly, then the original is shelo asani
: bor, which cannot be understood as being a reference to a mitzvah count (as
: a bor has the same mitzvah obligation as a talmud chacham)...

Then it would be:
1- Thank G-d for not making me someone who would neither be obligated nor
   would fulfil the mitzvos
2- Thank You for not making me someone obligated but doesn't fulfil the
   mitzvos (lo am ha'aretz chasid), and
3- Thank You for not making me someone for whom many mitzvos I am only an
   einah metzuvah ve'orah.

...
: And again, which the question that an eved is the same as an isha could be
: based on an equivalent level of obligation in the commandments (but again
: only if you posken, as I have previously posted, that an eved has no more
: mitzvos than an isha - and that is by no means pashut), it can also be
: equally well understood (as per Rashi's first explanation) that it is a
: matter of shibud....

Why emphasize Rashi's first explanation, if (as you already noted) the
providing of a second explanation means he found the first problematic?


On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 12:45:03PM +0100, Chana Luntz wrote:
: RAF writes:
:> In continuation of my previous post to Chana Luntz, my brother (R.
:> Prof.) Dov Frimer writes:

:> Aryeh, we already anticipated this in our WPG article around footnote
:> 26-  or more accurately the Rav did. See RHS, Eretz Hatzvi pp 96, at
:> length, where the Rav explains that an eved has only miktzat keddushat
:> yisrael - and therefore has certain partial OBLIGATIONS - while a woman
:> has complete kiddushat yisrael with partial EXEMPTIONS. While the
:> bottom line may be similar with regards to the performance of mitzvoth
:> aseh shz??g, the starting points are at exactly opposite poles.

: The problem I see with this is, that the exemption for avadim in
: relation to mitzvas aseh shehazman grama is learnt out a gezera shava
: "la", "la" from the obligations of a woman, as is explicit in Chagiga
: 4a....

I don't feel comfortable discussing the strength of RYBS's position
without seeing the lomdus he used to get to that point first. But...

Does a gezeira shava imply a thematic similarity, or only that the legal
result is the same?

I was under the impression that while derashah outranks peshat in halachic
authority, when it comes to values, we draw them from peshat. And in fact
there are cases, such as ayin tachas ayin, we were are told that the whole
reason why the peshat in the pasuq diverges from the din is to teach us
the value despite it being impossible to reflect directly into the law.

And if so, lah-lah doesn't rule out the possibilities that avadim are
peturim for entirely different reasons than the case we are learning from.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             People were created to be loved.
mi...@aishdas.org        Things were created to be used.
http://www.aishdas.org   The reason why the world is in chaos is that
Fax: (270) 514-1507      things are being loved, people are being used.

On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 01:53:42PM +0300, Simi Peters wrote:
: Any attempt to make sense of this midrash scientifically is completely
: misconceived; the midrash is not a scientific description of anything--it
: is a mashal (which for Hazal means a figurative use of language,
: allegory, parable, metaphor, etc.)....

I think this is overstatement. It's very possible chazal chose a
scientific idea to be their mashal. But it would require the science
being at the level of the students studying their meshalim in their time,
and not necessarily what we today believe the moon and sun are like.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             With the "Echad" of the Shema, the Jew crowns
mi...@aishdas.org        G-d as King of the entire cosmos and all four
http://www.aishdas.org   corners of the world, but sometimes he forgets
Fax: (270) 514-1507      to include himself.     - Rav Yisrael Salanter

RSP wrote:

Any attempt to make sense of this midrash scientifically is completely
misconceived; the midrash is not a scientific description of anything--it
is a mashal (which for Hazal means a figurative use of language, allegory,
parable, metaphor, etc.). For an example of a parshan (a rishon) who
approaches this midrash in non-literal terms, see the Ramban on Bereshit
1:14 (toward the end). IIRC correctly, Rav Dessler (aharon) has something
non-literal on this too.

CM responds:

So I think we are on the same page. I was just hitting you over the head with a reason not to read the medrash literally and seek some other meaning in it.

Kol Tuv

Chaim Manaster
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110830/2980c16b/attachment-0001.htm>

Has anyone heard of a psak regarding wetting and using Rice paper Sheets on 
Shabbat for wraps?

--------------------------------
Prof. Aryeh A. Frimer
Chemistry Dept., Bar-Ilan University
Ramat Gan 52900, ISRAEL
E-mail (office): Aryeh.Fri...@biu.ac.il or Fri...@biu.ac.il
E-mail (home): Frim...@zahav.net.il

a blogger wrote  the following---

A Sadducee and a left-leaning Orthodox Rabbi are about as different in 
practice and belief as a Pharisee and a right wing Orthodox Rabbi


---where does Pharisee leave  off , and O  pick up?  are not O jews  the 
natural extension and only followers of Phariseeism  ?
and  are the  two half  sentences valid  comparisons?


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110830/8b47b20b/attachment-0001.htm>

To the best of my knowledge, the only things linking us with Pharisees 
are Josephus and the treyfer sefer.  The Gemara actually criticizes the 
Perushim.

The two half sentences are a non sequitur.

Lisa

On 8/30/2011 1:55 PM, Saul.Z.New...@kp.org wrote:
>
> a blogger wrote the following---
>
> A Sadducee and a left-leaning Orthodox Rabbi are about as different in
> practice and belief as a Pharisee and a right wing Orthodox Rabbi
>
>
> ---where does Pharisee leave off , and O pick up? are not O jews the
> natural extension and only followers of Phariseeism ?
> and are the two half sentences valid comparisons?
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Avodah mailing list
> Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
> http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org

On 30/08/2011 3:33 PM, Lisa Liel wrote:
> To the best of my knowledge, the only things linking us with Pharisees
> are Josephus and the treyfer sefer.

"The early chassidim ... and they are called Prushim".
Rambam, Tum'as Ochlin 16:12

Mishnayos Yadayim 4:6-8 clearly identifies us with the Prushim, and
R Yochanan ben Zakai argues for them.

The gemara Kiddushin 66a identifies the Prushim with "chachmei Yisrael".

Yerushalmi Sanhedrin 10:2 ("daf" 52a) identifies Moshe Rabbenu and his
Sanhedrin as "Prushim"!




>  The Gemara actually criticizes the Perushim.

Presumably you refer to Sotah 22a, where the gemara criticises *fake*
Prushim.  (The NT's criticisms of "Pharisees" may be seen in the same
light, as aimed only at the fake ones.)

-- 
Zev Sero        If they use these guns against us once, at that moment
z...@sero.name   the Oslo Accord will be annulled and the IDF will
                 return to all the places that have been given to them.
                                            - Yitzchak Rabin

                    
                

The latest in the Igros Moshe series is out, and you might be interested to
read, in volume 6 of OC, Teshuva 2, which discusses the difference between
voluntary kiyum mitzvos of Zman Grama of a woman and of an eved, and segues
into a frank assessment of the first pshat in Rashi about a woman being a
maidservant to her husband.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110901/c6cae48a/attachment-0001.htm>

Moderator:  If this is too elementary for this list, I apologize; feel free 
to omit.

I have been puzzling over the list of vows in Kol Nidrei.  I finally have 
some grasp of their halachic definitions, but I'm having trouble thinking of 
modern day situations when each type of vow is made.  We have Neders, 
Assurs, Cherems, Konams, Kinuyei, Kinusei, and Shevuot.  Neder is easiest; 
I'm always trying to avoid them.  But can anyone help me come up with 
examples of vows in the other categories that someone might actually make 
nowadays? 

 From http://revach.net/article.php?id=366

If a person has a choice of two doctors, one of them is Shomer 
Mitzvos but is not a specialist for the particular procedure needed 
and the other doctor is a specialist however he is a Kofer, which one 
is preferable? The Igros Moshe (YD 4:8) says there is no question 
that the latter is preferable unless he is actively involved in 
seducing people away from keeping the Torah and Mitzvos. Otherwise 
since we have an obligation to seek medical help when needed 
according to the Rambam and most Rishonim, included in that 
obligation is the obligation to seek out the best doctor available 
whether he is a Jew or a non-Jew.

However adds Rav Moshe, since it is always possible that any doctor 
may err regardless of his expertise, we must pray to Hashem the true 
healer that the doctor will not blunder and his care will bring a cure.



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


Avodah mailing list
Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 28, Issue 179
***************************************

Send Avodah mailing list submissions to
	avodah@lists.aishdas.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
	avodah-owner@lists.aishdas.org

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