Avodah Mailing List

Volume 28: Number 233

Tue, 15 Nov 2011

< Previous Next >
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Message: 1
From: menucha <m...@inter.net.il>
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 16:52:09 +0200
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] [Areivim] "Kosher" Dental Environment


bounced from areivim

An practical idea may be a Kosher for Cohanim dental clinic.
See 
http://www.yutorah.
org/lectures/lecture.cfm/750242/Rabbi_Aryeh_Lebowitz/Ten_Minute_Halacha_-_M
ay_a_Kohein_Visit_the_Dentist
menucha

Prof. Levine wrote:

> An ad appeared in this week's Torah Times for a dentist which reads
>
> Are you looking for honest
> quality dental care in
> a Kosher environment?
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20111114/5c6e61ab/attachment-0001.htm>


Go to top.

Message: 2
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 22:00:40 -0500
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] Chillul HaShem when NJ are the observers


On 14/11/2011 9:57 AM, Meir Rabi wrote:
> Is it not clear from Rashi that a Chilul HaShemis prompted by a negative impressions be it by Jews and NJws?

It depends what is causing this "negative" impression.  The argument
you are making is precisely that which was used in the last generation
to tell people to remove their yarmulke, because it's a "chilul haShem"!
Of course that is exactly backwards.  Wearing a yarmulke in public,
demonstrating in public that yidden are different, is a kiddush haShem.

When Haman says "yeshno am echad", that there is a nation that refuses
to follow the normal customs of society, he certainly views it negatively;
indeed he uses it as a reason to wipe us out r"l.  And yet it's clear from
that very source that this was a kiddush haShem.  And of course all the
kedoshim created "a terrible chilul haShem" according to your argument,
by refusing to serve AZ like everyone else, by making a spectacle of
themselves and insisting on their peculiar worship.  Avraham Avinu - what
a disgrace he was!  Chananya, Mishael, and Azaria - more chilul haShem!
Chana's children -- such chutzpah they had!  They certainly didn't make
the goyim think well of Jews!

The answer is obvious.  Kiddush haShem consists of the observer seeing
how yidden stick to haShem, Torah, and Mitzvos; whether the observer
likes it or not.  And chilul haShem consists of the observer seeing the
opposite, even if he approves and thinks us fine people for doing so.


-- 
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

                    
                



Go to top.

Message: 3
From: T6...@aol.com
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 12:41:34 -0500 (EST)
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] In this week's parsha in the parsha of the




 
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Subject: Re: In this week's  parsha in the parsha of the akaida AA says 
"venashuva  alaichem."


On 11/11/2011 10:56 AM, hankman wrote:
>> This is slightly  problematic. A novie knows what he is prophesizing<<

What makes you  say that?  "Niba, velo yada ma niba".

-- 
Zev  Sero         
z...@sero.name   






>>>>
 
That is correct, niba velo yada ma niba, but what did he /think/ he was  
saying?  He said "nashuva aleichem" but with the intention of coming back  
alone.  
 
Maybe he thought he would come back carrying Yitzchak's bones or ashes for  
burial?  Or maybe "nashuva" was the royal we?  Or maybe he was  thinking of 
a far distant future?
 
This question reminds me of the passage where Yakov and Esav meet after  
many years, and then part.  Esav says, "Come with me to Seir" and Yakov  
answers, "You go on ahead, I have to go slow because of the kinderlach, I'll  
catch up with you later.  Ani esnahalah le'itti...ad asher avo el adoni  Seirah 
(Ber 33:14)."
 
Rashi says that Yakov had no intention of catching up to Esav, not knowing  
if he would be greeted with friendship or hostility.  "Vehu lo halach,  
ve'eimasai yelech?  Beyemei haMoshiach."  Yakov never did go to Seir,  and when 
will he go?  When Moshiach comes.
 
Maybe Avraham had some such thought in mind, "We will return to you, alive  
again, when Moshiach comes."
 
 

--Toby  Katz
================




_____________________  







-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20111115/31f498f9/attachment-0001.htm>


Go to top.

Message: 4
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 13:52:57 -0500
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] In this week's parsha in the parsha of the


On 15/11/2011 12:41 PM, T6...@aol.com wrote:
> That is correct, niba velo yada ma niba, but what did he /think/ he was saying?  He said "nashuva aleichem" but with the intention of coming back alone.
> Maybe he thought he would come back carrying Yitzchak's bones or ashes
> for burial?  Or maybe "nashuva" was the royal we?	Or maybe he was
> thinking of a far distant future?

The simple pshat is that he didn't want to let them know what he planned
to do.  If he had said "I will return" they would immediately guess what
was going on, and would stop him.  IOW he was lying, just as Yaacov did
to Esav in the other story you cited.

-- 
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

                    
                



Go to top.

Message: 5
From: Yonatan Kaganoff <ykagan...@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 09:18:59 -0500
Subject:
[Avodah] Question about Avraham and Sarah at Avimelech's


A friend of mine had a question about the narrative in last week's *Parsha,
Veyara*. In *Lech Lecha *Avram forms an army and fights the armies of the
Four Kings to free his nephew Lot from captivity.

However, in *Veyara* when Sarah is taken by Avimelech Avraham acts
passively and lets Avimelech's soldiers take Sarah. If when his nephew was
captured Avraham takes up arms, why does he not do the same when Sarah is
taken?

My friend wanted to know if any of the traditional commentators address
this question. Does anyone on the list-serv have any sources or
suggestions?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20111115/ad6125a0/attachment-0001.htm>


Go to top.

Message: 6
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 14:24:52 -0500
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] Chillul HaShem when NJ are the observers


On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 10:00:40PM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
> On 14/11/2011 9:57 AM, Meir Rabi wrote:
>> Is it not clear from Rashi that a Chilul HaShemis prompted by a
>> negative impressions be it by Jews and NJws?

> It depends what is causing this "negative" impression....

I'm not sure that's true. Recall RMR's source text:
>> Yoma 86a  Abaya referring to the Braysa says: We learn from VeAhavta es
>> HaShem that one should cause Gds Name to be beloved.

This isn't the classical source, Vayiqra 22:32, "Velo sechallelu as sheim
qodshi veniqdashti besokh BY..." Still, that would at most imply that
"chilul Hashem" isn't technically the correct label, but the idea being
labeled is valid -- Abayei gives it. And whether or not it is the same
concept or a different mandate revolves around how we explain the pasuq
"velo sechallelu..."

Rashi and Ramban both explain "velo sechalelu" in terms of issur.

OTOH, Sefer haMitzvos asei 9 defines "veniqdashti" in terms of "lefarseim
das emes". Admittedly his focus is on dying al qiddush Hashem. Still, the
notion that qiddush Hashem is grounded in getting Jews and non-Jews
wanting to worship the Borei appears to fit the Rambam.

So, the issur in leading non-Jews away from emunah in a Borei might well
not be chilul Hashem. But in any case, assur.

Our idea is also in Y-mi BM 2:5 (8a), and Devarim Rabba 3:5 "Mah". R'
Shimon ben Shetach got a donkey from his talmidim that they bought from
a nachri. He found under the saddle some kind of gem. Lehalakhah, RSBS
could have kept it, since the terms of the sale were "this donkey and
everything on it is ours", and the students were excited at the idea
that their rebbe was now freed from worrying about money. However, RSBS
returned the gem, and the nachri proclaimed, "Berikh E-lahhon diYhuda'ei,
Maagar kol hadin alma!" A similar story is told about Aba Ushia the
launderer, who returned jewelry the queen lost in her clothes, telling
her that the Torah requires hashavas aveidah, and the queen proclaims,
"Berikh E-lahhon diYhuda'ei!"

Yuma has Rav giving an example of chilul Hashem as buying meat and not
paying right away (not the relevent part), iqa de'amrei it is anything
that "chaveirav misbayashim machmas shemu'aso".

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             A person lives with himself for seventy years,
mi...@aishdas.org        and after it is all over, he still does not
http://www.aishdas.org   know himself.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            - Rav Yisrael Salanter



Go to top.

Message: 7
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 14:28:58 -0500
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] In this week's parsha in the parsha of the


On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 12:41:34PM -0500, T6...@aol.com wrote:
: Maybe he thought he would come back carrying Yitzchak's bones or ashes for  
: burial?  Or maybe "nashuva" was the royal we?  Or maybe he was  thinking of 
: a far distant future?

It's impossible to know what Avraham avinu was thinking. I *imagine*
he himself didn't know. Recall that he was already promised that
"ki miYitzchaq yiqarei lekha zara", and Yitzchaq had no children yet.
No matter how sure Avraham was of the tzivui, he also must have been sure
that somehow Yitzchaq would be producing a nation kokokhvei hashamayim
larov.

Coginitive dissonance? Simple confusion? Avraham expected techiyas hameis?
I don't know. But it's not as simple as being certain Yitzchaq wouldn't be
around [again?] to return down the mountain.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             None of us will leave this place alive.
mi...@aishdas.org        All that is left to us is
http://www.aishdas.org   to be as human as possible while we are here.
Fax: (270) 514-1507            - Anonymous MD, while a Nazi prisoner



Go to top.

Message: 8
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 14:32:33 -0500
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] Chillul HaShem when NJ are the observers


On 15/11/2011 2:24 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 10:00:40PM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
>> On 14/11/2011 9:57 AM, Meir Rabi wrote:
>>> Is it not clear from Rashi that a Chilul HaShemis prompted by a
>>> negative impressions be it by Jews and NJws?
>
>> It depends what is causing this "negative" impression....
>
> I'm not sure that's true.

How does any of what you quote contradict this?  Everything that you
quote only supports my point.  The examples are all things that are
negative in themselves, and therefore cause right-minded people to
have a negative impression.  People who get a negative impression
from positive things, and a positive impression from negative things
are obviously not the standard by which this is judge.



-- 
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

                    
                



Go to top.

Message: 9
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 14:46:43 -0500
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] Chillul HaShem when NJ are the observers


On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 02:32:33PM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
> How does any of what you quote contradict this?  Everything that you
> quote only supports my point.  The examples are all things that are
> negative in themselves, and therefore cause right-minded people to
> have a negative impression.  People who get a negative impression
> from positive things, and a positive impression from negative things
> are obviously not the standard by which this is judge.

To quote RZS from Dec 2007
<http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol24/v24n110.shtml#04>, though:
> Charging interest and failing to return lost property are not negative
> actions, which come from or could engender bad middos.  They are the
> normal way we should expect to interact with strangers. ...
>           And if someone has been careless enough to lose something
> and you were lucky enough to find it, why on earth should you expend
> time and energy to track them down, and then give it to them?  What have
> they ever done for you, that you should do them such favours?  

Four years ago you were arguing that hashavas aveidah doesn't apply
to a nachri's aveidah because it's /NOT/ negative in itself.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             The fittingness of your matzos [for the seder]
mi...@aishdas.org        isn't complete with being careful in the laws
http://www.aishdas.org   of Passover. One must also be very careful in
Fax: (270) 514-1507      the laws of business.    - Rav Yisrael Salanter



Go to top.

Message: 10
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 14:58:23 -0500
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] Chillul HaShem when NJ are the observers


On 15/11/2011 2:46 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 02:32:33PM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
>> How does any of what you quote contradict this?  Everything that you
>> quote only supports my point.  The examples are all things that are
>> negative in themselves, and therefore cause right-minded people to
>> have a negative impression.  People who get a negative impression
>> from positive things, and a positive impression from negative things
>> are obviously not the standard by which this is judge.
>
> To quote RZS from Dec 2007
> <http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol24/v24n110.shtml#04>, though:
>> Charging interest and failing to return lost property are not negative
>> actions, which come from or could engender bad middos.  They are the
>> normal way we should expect to interact with strangers. ...
>>            And if someone has been careless enough to lose something
>> and you were lucky enough to find it, why on earth should you expend
>> time and energy to track them down, and then give it to them?  What have
>> they ever done for you, that you should do them such favours?
>
> Four years ago you were arguing that hashavas aveidah doesn't apply
> to a nachri's aveidah because it's /NOT/ negative in itself.

It isn't.  Failing to return it is not a chilul haShem.  But for that
very reason, returning it is a kiddush haShem.  The goy has no reason
to expect you to do it; he wouldn't have done it himself, and if you
were to keep it he would accept that as perfectly normal.  So if you go
out of your way to give it to him he will feel grateful.  But he's
feeling grateful at something positive, something you're doing for
Hashem, not at something negative, such as appearing to give respect
to his religion.


-- 
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

                    
                



Go to top.

Message: 11
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 15:47:33 -0500
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] Chillul HaShem when NJ are the observers


Zev,

On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 02:58:23PM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
> It isn't.  Failing to return it is not a chilul haShem.  But for that
> very reason, returning it is a kiddush haShem.  The goy has no reason
> to expect you to do it; he wouldn't have done it himself, and if you
> were to keep it he would accept that as perfectly normal.  So if you go
> out of your way to give it to him he will feel grateful....

That's my entire point -- qiddush H' is in the gratitude that draws
someone to avodas Hashem. I took it for granted that if I proved
that qiddush Hashem isn't necessarily tied to following halakhhah,
rather that which makes someone, Jewish or not, say "berikh E-lahaha
deYdua'ei!" then it was only natural that chiullul Hashem would include
any act that would push someone away.

Are you arguing that qiddush Hashem is that which draws people to
avodas Hashem, but chilul Hashem is NOT that which ch"v pushes them
away?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             I long to accomplish a great and noble task,
mi...@aishdas.org        but it is my chief duty to accomplish small
http://www.aishdas.org   tasks as if they were great and noble.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                              - Helen Keller



Go to top.

Message: 12
From: Saul.Z.New...@kp.org
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 12:16:40 -0800
Subject:
[Avodah] bat issues


http://www.rationalistjudaism.com/2011/11/bat-responsa.html

some modern  torah  approaches  to  realities  of  today's science,  in 
this  case  bat  reproduction 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20111115/d39068d3/attachment-0001.htm>


Go to top.

Message: 13
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 16:23:03 -0500
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] Chillul HaShem when NJ are the observers


Further to my previous post:

The Malbim asks how the angels could eat Avraham's food.  It's easy to
understand how they could *pretend* to eat, but the Torah says that they
actually ate, and to eat ("le'echol") means to derive sustenance.  How
could the angels do that?  He answers that these angels were created by
Avraham's chessed, and so they were sustained by that chessed.  They may
have pretended to physically eat the food, by putting it in their mouths
and making it disappear; but at the same time they really did "eat" the
sentiment with which it was given.  Then he explains that since they were
all mal'achim of chessed, their missions were also ones of chessed; to
tell Sarah the good news, to heal Avraham, to rescue Lot -- and to
destroy Sedom!  How is that chessed?  Yes, chessed includes destroying
anti-chessed.  Sedom is to chessed as antimatter is to matter, and
it is davka chessed that annihilates it.

Ditto for kiddush and chilul haShem.  Creating a negative feeling in
someone whose values are reversed is a kiddush haShem, and creating a
positive feeling in him is a chilul haShem.

-- 
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

                    
                



Go to top.

Message: 14
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 16:17:40 -0500
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] Chillul HaShem when NJ are the observers


On 15/11/2011 3:47 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> Zev,
>
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 02:58:23PM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
>> >  It isn't.  Failing to return it is not a chilul haShem.  But for that
>> >  very reason, returning it is a kiddush haShem.  The goy has no reason
>> >  to expect you to do it; he wouldn't have done it himself, and if you
>> >  were to keep it he would accept that as perfectly normal.  So if you go
>> >  out of your way to give it to him he will feel grateful....
> That's my entire point -- qiddush H' is in the gratitude that draws
> someone to avodas Hashem. I took it for granted that if I proved
> that qiddush Hashem isn't necessarily tied to following halakhhah,
> rather that which makes someone, Jewish or not, say "berikh E-lahaha
> deYdua'ei!" then it was only natural that chiullul Hashem would include
> any act that would push someone away.
>
> Are you arguing that qiddush Hashem is that which draws people to
> avodas Hashem, but chilul Hashem is NOT that which ch"v pushes them
> away?

I am arguing that whatever theory you have *must* accommodate what we
*know* about kiddush and chilul haShem.  You cannot pull a piece of
agadeta out and twist it so that it contradicts established halacha and
minhag avoseinu.

I am arguing that what matters is not "ma yomru habriyos" (you are
surely aware yourself of how much proof we have against that), not
whether they *like* what we do, which means in effect whether what
we do comports with their subjective and possibly tamei preferences,
but whether they get a lesson in darkei Hashem.  Chessed is a positive
midah, a derech of Hashem.  Sometimes it's required of us; sometimes
it's not required, but if we display it anyway we show them what Hashem
is like, and that is a kiddush haShem.  And I am arguing that it makes
absolutely no difference whether this makes them feel good or bad about
us.

Take Lot's wife, who reacted to Lot's request for salt to give his
guests by complaining "do you mean to introduce this evil custom too?!"
According to the position that you seem to be arguing, what Lot did was
a chilul haShem!  He caused his wife to think the worse of him and all
those who follow his ways, and of Hashem in Whose ways he was following;
and presumably he would have had the same effect on any normal member
of that society.  The logical conclusion is that he should have been
careful to do his mitzvah of hachnasas orchim in a more measured and
"civilised" way, accommodating local mores as much as he could.  Feeding
them, meilah, but salt?!  Such a chossid he has to be?!  Chilul Hashem!
And I am arguing that on the contrary, what he did was a kiddush haShem;
making his wife angry, throwing in her face that this is how a Jew
behaves, and that he will do the right thing no matter what anyone thinks
of him, is exactly what kiddush haShem means.

And exactly the same applies to spitting at AZ.  Rejecting and being
disgusted by AZ is the essence of right and justice.  It is the ultimate
good; it's the definition of a Yehudi - "mi shemodeh baH' vekofer baAZ".
And visibly expressing this disgust is the equivalent of giving the
guests salt, or indeed of returning the stone to the donkey seller.
An observer who shares our beliefs will approve; one who believes in the
AZ will disapprove; kiddush haShem means seeking the first one's approval
and the second one's *dis*approval.

-- 
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

                    
                



Go to top.

Message: 15
From: "Prof. Levine" <llev...@stevens.edu>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 16:38:06 -0500
Subject:
[Avodah] An Analysis of Various Minhagim Concerning Waiting


The latest issue of the OU Daf HaKashrus deal with the above 
topic.  I have posted this issue at http://bit.ly/vJtm1o

http://www.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/kashrus/daf20-1c.pdf

YL




Go to top.

Message: 16
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 16:48:50 -0500
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] Chillul HaShem when NJ are the observers


On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 04:17:40PM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
> I am arguing that whatever theory you have *must* accommodate what we
> *know* about kiddush and chilul haShem.  You cannot pull a piece of
> agadeta out and twist it so that it contradicts established halacha and
> minhag avoseinu.

I dispute both your assumption of what minhag avoseinu was, and your
notion that quoting an aggadita (and Rambam's sefer hamitzvos) is
"twisting" it.

Your concept of norms in generations past does not match stories in R'
Dov Katz's Tenu'as haMussar, nor those in the hagiographies of R' Yaakov
Kamenecki, R' Aharon Kotler, R' Avraham Pam, etc...

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha



Go to top.

Message: 17
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 16:51:35 -0500
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] Chillul HaShem when NJ are the observers


On 15/11/2011 4:48 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> I dispute both your assumption of what minhag avoseinu was,

Do you dispute that spitting when passing a church is minhag avoseinu?!


-- 
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

                    
                



Go to top.

Message: 18
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 17:04:55 -0500
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] Chillul HaShem when NJ are the observers


On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 04:51:35PM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
> On 15/11/2011 4:48 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
>> I dispute both your assumption of what minhag avoseinu was,

> Do you dispute that spitting when passing a church is minhag avoseinu?!

I doubt that spitting when observed by a nachri was done very often. I
doubt there ever was a minhag Yisrael that carried such risk of piquach
nefesh.

Nidon didan wasn't the case you cited either. It was spitting when
passing the galach.

In the meantime, you're not working on a definition of qiddush hasheim
that relates to the usage in Yuma. (Which is only as aggadic as the
entire topic.) The embarassing is a chilul hasheim, which appears to
explicitly validate the position you're arguing against.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             For a mitzvah is a lamp,
mi...@aishdas.org        And the Torah, its light.
http://www.aishdas.org                   - based on Mishlei 6:2
Fax: (270) 514-1507


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 28, Issue 233
***************************************

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..."


< Previous Next >