Avodah Mailing List

Volume 29: Number 13

Mon, 06 Feb 2012

• 1. Re: hakaras hatov required?? (Micha Berger)
• 2. frogs (Eli Turkel)
• 3. Re: s&amora (Micha Berger)
• 4. Re: R' Aharon Lichtenstein on Daas Torah (Micha Berger)
• 5. Re: s&amora (Lisa Liel)
• 6. The Jews fed the Mitzrim During Makas Choshech (Micha Berger)
• 7. Zippering A Hood To A Coat On Shabbos (Prof. Levine)
• 8. Re: Zippering A Hood To A Coat On Shabbos (Micha Berger)
• 9. Re: The Jews fed the Mitzrim During Makas Choshech (Zev Sero)
• 10. Re: The Jews fed the Mitzrim During Makas Choshech (Micha Berger)
• 11. Re: The Jews fed the Mitzrim During Makas Choshech (Micha Berger)
• 12. Re: The Jews fed the Mitzrim During Makas Choshech (Zev Sero)
• 13. Re: The Jews fed the Mitzrim During Makas Choshech (Zev Sero)
• 14. Chodosh Article from Rabbi Yehuda Baum (Prof. Levine)
• 15. Another Article on Chodosh ? Rabbi Yehuda Spitz (Prof. Levine)
• 16. why stop learning? (Saul.Z.New...@kp.org)
• 17. Re: why stop learning? (Micha Berger)
• 18. Re: why stop learning? (Rich, Joel)

On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 07:09:53AM +0000, Elazar M. Teitz wrote:
:> Doesn't R' Chanina segan hakohanim (Avos 3:2) require hakaras hatov of
:> the gov't just for creating the fear that reduces crime? Or are we told
:> to praying for its peace for other reasons?<

: I understood it to mean that we pray for its peace so that it can
: continue to create the fear, not as an expression of thanks for it.

Thinking out why I assumed it was hakaras hatov, I realized this:

Shalom is only one of the things such a state needs to function well
enough to provide a deterrant level of law inforcement. So why not
"pray for your gov't" in general? I therefore read it as a halakhah to
pray for its peace, because of the recognition that it provides yours.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Feeling grateful  to or appreciative of  someone
mi...@aishdas.org        or something in your life actually attracts more
http://www.aishdas.org   of the things that you appreciate and value into
Fax: (270) 514-1507      your life.         - Christiane Northrup, M.D.

<< On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 10:26:19PM +0200, Eli Turkel wrote:
: Pof. Sperber based on many poofs claims that tzefardea is a crocodile and
: and not a frog

Rabbeinu Chananel, Ibn Ezra and Abarbanel said it first. >>

I mentioned that Sperber had proofs. Many of these are earlier meforshim.
He did not claim
that it was his original idea.
see
http://www.biu.ac.il/JH/Parasha/eng/vaera/spe.html

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120202/3773aabc/attachment-0001.htm>

On Wed, Feb 01, 2012 at 05:05:45PM -0600, Lisa Liel wrote:
: In Pirkei Avot, it talks about 4 types of people:
:     * One who says, "What is mine is yours and what is yours is yours"
:       is a /hassid/.
:     * One who says, "What is mine is mine and what is yours is yours" is
:       a regular person. Others say that this is the behavior of Sodom.
:     * One who says, "What is mine is mine and what is yours is mine" is
:       an evil person.
:     * One who says, "What is mine is yours and what is yours is mine" is
:       a fool.

: And that's the answer to your question. How can there be such a disparity
: between the two views of the second type of person? I can't see how, if
: they're talking about the same thing. But there are two ways of reading
: "what's mine is mine and what's yours is yours." One is that we are
: allowed to do what we want with our own property/money, and the other is
: that we aren't. That what's yours *must* remain yours. And what's mine
: *must* remain mine. And that neither of us has a choice in the matter.

In Choshein Mishpat, "kofin al midas Sodom", one can force a party to
drop his claim if that claim is rooted in midas Sodom. This gives us
another place to look for finding Sodom's sin.

In a situation of "zeh neheneh vezeh lo chaseir", the owner can't simply
charge for use of his property (BQ 20a-b and brought halakhah lemaaseh
by the Rama CM 363:6,10). Tosafos (BB 12b) says that this doesn't mean he
is obgliated to give permission to use it. And if there was any damage,
he could insist on damages as well as the value of the hana'ah (since
it's no longer "vezeh lo chaseir").

So, it would seem that midas Sodom is about caring about the other not
getting even when it's not a competition for resources, when there is
no hana'ah -- other than that of the power trip itself.

: The Midrash says that they used to mark the coins in Sdom so that if you
: gave tzedaka, you could be found out and punished. What the people of
: Sdom did was the flip side of what the Dor ha-Palga did. They simply
: abolished personal ownership entirely. Everything belonged to the king,
: or society, or what have you. In both cases, the very essence of being a
: human being, with personal autonomy and the corresponding responsibility,
: was eliminated. And without that, physical destruction is pretty much
: just an afterthought.

While RSRH also reads the Dor haPelaga as being totalitarian, he says it
was Fascist rather than Communist. (See 19 Leters, 6th Letter.) Thus the
loss of a brick was more mourned than the loss of a person. Everything
became about the state's goals. People were reduced to cogs in a machine
to accomplish the Fatherland's mission.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             It's nice to be smart,
mi...@aishdas.org        but it's smarter to be nice.
http://www.aishdas.org                   - R' Lazer Brody
Fax: (270) 514-1507

On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 07:44:52PM +0200, Marty Bluke wrote:
: R' Lichtenstein spoke on Chanuka about Daas Torah and his talk has been
: transcribed and published here:
: http://bit.ly/A1zsvv

For those whose Hebrew was overly weak for the amount of time or effort
they would dedicate to reading it, there is an unauthorized English
translation by R' Joseph Faith at
<http://www.zootorah.com/RationalistJudaism/DaatTorahLichtenstein.pdf&g
t;.

AIUI, his conclusion is that the only chiyuv to follow da'as Torah is
on religious questions. It makes logical sense to follow da'as Torah on
other questions, but DT is a rarity nowadays, if it is around at all.
He laments the days of RSZA, when DT was available.

There can be a talmud chakham without daas, since the gemara calls such
people worse than neveilos. So being a TC doesn't guarantee that the TC
posesses da'as.

In fact, since we now produce rabbanim by keeping them isolated from
the lifestyle of most of the sho'alim and the realia about which they're
being asked, it is impossible for today's talmidei chakhamim and poseqim
to apply DT to the kinds of questions we're discussing. In contrast to
the requirement for a member of Sanhedrin to know multiple languages
(Sanhedrin 17a) and thus be open to multiple perspectives and forms of
wisdom. RAL also cites the Netziv, who requires dayanim to be open and
broadly educated, not one who never leaves the 4 amos shel halakhah. And
the Gra, (Sifra deTzniusa) that requires studying language and grammar.

The Rambam and the Noda biYhudah lived amongst the people.

OTOH, R' Gamliel was impeached, in part, because he was too cut off from
the lifestyle of those he led.

And yet the rabbanim being asked for DT rarely are willing to say "I
don't know" or "this is not my field of expertise". They are removed from
the reality about which they're asked -- both in background and by the
cadre of askanim around them -- they simply don't have da'as relevant
to the question.

Last, RAL cites the Sifri on "ve'ahavta es H' E-lokekha" -- that we
are to make HQBH beloved by humanity, like Avraham did. A rav's job
is to bring others to Ahavas Hashem. If he isn't, if he instead digs
his heals in deeper, if his behavior is a violation of lifnei iveir in
causing hatred of G-d and of other Jews, one has experimental evidence
of a lack of da'as in general, and thus DT.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Life isn't about finding yourself
mi...@aishdas.org        Life is about creating yourself.
http://www.aishdas.org                - Bernard Shaw
Fax: (270) 514-1507

On 2/2/2012 2:52 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 01, 2012 at 05:05:45PM -0600, Lisa Liel wrote:
>
> : The Midrash says that they used to mark the coins in Sdom so that if you
> : gave tzedaka, you could be found out and punished. What the people of
> : Sdom did was the flip side of what the Dor ha-Palga did. They simply
> : abolished personal ownership entirely. Everything belonged to the king,
> : or society, or what have you. In both cases, the very essence of being a
> : human being, with personal autonomy and the corresponding responsibility,
> : was eliminated. And without that, physical destruction is pretty much
> : just an afterthought.
>
> While RSRH also reads the Dor haPelaga as being totalitarian, he says it
> was Fascist rather than Communist. (See 19 Leters, 6th Letter.) Thus the
> loss of a brick was more mourned than the loss of a person. Everything
> became about the state's goals. People were reduced to cogs in a machine
> to accomplish the Fatherland's mission.
>
Fascism would be letting people own their own things, but controlling 
how they use them.  Communism is saying no one owns anything.  It seems 
to me that the former fits Sdom, and the latter fits Dor HaPalga.  YMMV.

Lisa

OK, I saw this idea, I thought in the Yalqut Reuveini:

During the 3 days of choshekh in which the Mitzriim could not move, how
did they eat? After all, a shevu'ah not to eat for 3 days is assumed to
be violated even at the beginning, since a person can't live three days
without food. So, if the Mitzriim didn't die, how did they eat?

So, the answer I riffed on in a devar Torah at R' Mordechai Machles's
home was that the Jews fed them. This leading into a whole bein adam
lachaveiro message about lo siqom, relating to non-Jews, etc... How the
Mitzriim didn't come help (at least not in numbers enough to be recorded
in the Torah) when vayiz'aqu min ha'avodah, but we came when they needed
us. Bein or lachoshekh, bein Yisrael la'amim.

I didn't say, but was thinking that perhaps this could answer another
question I had... HQBH promised Avraham we would leave with a rechush
gadol. I'm sure AA would be happy we would end up rich, but is this
really the greatest thing a tzadiq would hope for? So, I once offered a
chassidishe style answer, repunctuating a pasuq from after makas Choshekh
(11:2): Daber na be'zanei ha'am -- that they should ask, every man of
their neighbor and every woman of her neighbor, gold utensils and silver
utensils. And Chazal say that HQBH said "na" because He "needed a favor"
(kavayachol-quotes) in order to fulfil His promise. I suggested they meant
that Avraham's "rechush gadol" could only be in his middah, chessed. The
wealth was that Moshe put the word "na" in the ears of the people --
teaching them to say "please", even in this situation. But now I could
answer without playing with the punctuation: that Avraham's rechush
gadol of chesed was sustaining the Mitzrim during the makkah!

Problem is, RMM didn't find the core idea from which I built this vort.
So he called me up last night (which I just realized means he was learning
at 3:03 am, his time) and asked me to help him find it. And I also failed.
The YR on Bo doesn't say anything about the Jews feeding the Mitzriim.
So, where did I see it; does anyone want to help me look?

Hint: probably a sefer with similar visuals...

:-)BBii!
-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.

 From http://revach.net/article.php?id=4359

Zippering A Hood To A Coat On Shabbos
The Mishna Brura writes (317:15) that if you have new article of 
clothing you may not insert on Shabbos its belts and strings that are 
left there permanently  because you are Misaken Mana or fixing the item.

The Piskei Tshuvos brings from the Chelkas Yaakov that attaching a 
hood to a coat with a zipper, in the beginning of the winter for the 
entire winter is assur just the same.  He also brings from Rav Vosner 
that it is even the Milacha of Tofeir sewing since it will remain 
permanently for the winter.  Moreover he brings from Rav Binyomin 
Zilber in Az Nidbiru that even snapping on an Atara on a talis is assur.

However he says there are those who are matir in all these cases 
because it is not Tefira and it is like buttoning your clothing which 
is permissible even for an extended period of time.  The matirim 
include the Btzel HaChochma, the Debriciner Rav, Rav Yehonoson 
Shteiff, and Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120203/d98a786e/attachment-0001.htm>

On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 06:37:35AM -0500, Prof. Levine wrote:
> From http://revach.net/article.php?id=4359

> Zippering A Hood To A Coat On Shabbos
> The Mishna Brura writes (317:15) that if you have new article of  
> clothing you may not insert on Shabbos its belts and strings that are  
> left there permanently  because you are Misaken Mana or fixing the item.

It's s"q 16 (not 15).

> The Piskei Tshuvos brings from the Chelkas Yaakov that attaching a hood 
> to a coat with a zipper, in the beginning of the winter for the entire 
> winter is assur just the same....

Which is not the MB's shitah, since he distinguishes between the first
time the shoe is laced and replacing laces (even if for months of use).
And, the MB is discussing mesaqein mana, and the PT:
>                                 He also brings from Rav Vosner that it is 
> even the Milacha of Tofeir sewing since it will remain permanently for 
> the winter.  Moreover he brings from Rav Binyomin Zilber in Az Nidbiru 

> However he says there are those who are matir in all these cases because 
> it is not Tefira and it is like buttoning your clothing which is 
> permissible even for an extended period of time.  The matirim include the 
> Btzel HaChochma, the Debriciner Rav, Rav Yehonoson Shteiff, and Rav 
> Shlomo Zalman Auerbach.

I think Revach was misleading. The story should have read that rov
haposqim hold that lacing a shoe or tzippering a hood onto a coat are
mutar these things, and there are a couple of machmirim. Instead they
portray the MB as defining the mainstream, and the rov are "the matirim
include..."

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Man is a drop of intellect drowning in a sea
mi...@aishdas.org        of instincts.
http://www.aishdas.org                         - Rav Yisrael Salanter
Fax: (270) 514-1507

On 3/02/2012 6:18 AM, Micha Berger wrote:
> a shevu'ah not to eat for 3 days is assumed to
> be violated even at the beginning, since a person can't live three days
> without food

Your premise is incorrect, therefore kusya me'ikara leisa.  A person
can certainly live for three days without food, and one who takes a
shevu`ah to do so must keep it.  The period you're thinking of is
seven days, not three.

-- 
Zev Sero        "Natural resources are not finite in any meaningful
z...@sero.name    economic sense, mind-boggling though this assertion
                  may be. The stocks of them are not fixed but rather
                 are expanding through human ingenuity."
                                            - Julian Simon

On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 01:07:29PM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
> On 3/02/2012 6:18 AM, Micha Berger wrote:
>> a shevu'ah not to eat for 3 days is assumed to
>> be violated even at the beginning, since a person can't live three days
>> without food

> Your premise is incorrect, therefore kusya me'ikara leisa.  A person
> can certainly live for three days without food, and one who takes a
> shevu`ah to do so must keep it.  The period you're thinking of is
> seven days, not three.

I was only half wrong. Y-mi, Nedarim, 2:1:
    A shevu'ah that "I will not sleep during 3 days" -- give him malqos
    and he could sleep immediately.
    A shevu'ah that "I will not eat [akhilah implicitly include shetiyah]
    during 3 days" -- wait him out until he eats, and then give him
    malqos.

So, it's possible enough not to be a shevu'as shav (my half wrong), it is
still singled out as being incredibly unlikely -- which I am considering
my "half right", since clearly a whole nation didn't survive that way.

At least not miderekh hateva. A simpler suggestion to the one I'm hunting
for a maqor for would simply be that survival without food was part of
the general neis of a darkness that had substance.

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             "As long as the candle is still burning,
mi...@aishdas.org        it is still possible to accomplish and to
http://www.aishdas.org   mend."
Fax: (270) 514-1507          - Anonymous shoemaker to R' Yisrael Salanter

Call off the search, I found a maqor -- the Netziv. He doesn't cite an
earlier one so it's probably the Netzi's chiddush. HaEimeq Davar on 11:2,
d"h "Ish mei'eis rei'eihu vego'", explaining why they are "rei'eihu"
but in pereq 3 it was "mishekheintah":
    ... in makas choshekh, when "shelo qamu ish mitachtav 3 yamim" how
    did they all fast for 3 days? Rather, Yisrael, who were a light in
    their homes, stuck out (hoshitu) before them food and everything
    they needed. And through this, Yisrael obtained a great chein in
    their eyes.

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Brains to the lazy
mi...@aishdas.org        are like a torch to the blind --
http://www.aishdas.org   a useless burden.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                 - Bechinas HaOlam

The Bavli does not mention anywhere a limit on how long it's possible
to fast.  The Rambam paskens halacha lema'aseh that the limit is seven
days, not three; AFAIK there is no contrary opinion.
http://mechon-mamre.org/i/6101.htm#7
http://mechon-mamre.org/i/6105.htm#20

> So, it's possible enough not to be a shevu'as shav (my half wrong), it is
> still singled out as being incredibly unlikely -- which I am considering
> my "half right", since clearly a whole nation didn't survive that way.

On the contrary, Esther 4:16 proves that it's perfectly possible for an
entire nation to do it, and not at all unlikely; kal vachomer if one is
physically constrained from eating rather than having to restrain oneself
only by force of will.

As for the Y'mi, there are two possible answers.  The Shyarei Hakorban
says it's a ta`us sofer, and should say seven days; and the Rambam
argues and says that it's impossible and one is lokeh immediately and
may eat.   Another possibility is that the Y'mi is merely contrasting
eating with sleeping and saying that while it's impossible to go three
days without sleep going three days without food or drink is merely
difficult, so he has to keep his word as long as he can.  If this is so,
then when the Rambam gives a limit of seven days he may be relying on his
own knowledge as a doctor.  The Or Sameach suggests that the Rambam's
source *may* be from Yoma 4b, which says that it takes six days to get
rid of all the food in a person's system.




-- 
Zev Sero        "Natural resources are not finite in any meaningful
z...@sero.name    economic sense, mind-boggling though this assertion
                  may be. The stocks of them are not fixed but rather
                 are expanding through human ingenuity."
                                            - Julian Simon

On 3/02/2012 2:10 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> Call off the search, I found a maqor -- the Netziv. He doesn't cite an
> earlier one so it's probably the Netzi's chiddush. HaEimeq Davar on 11:2,
> d"h "Ish mei'eis rei'eihu vego'", explaining why they are "rei'eihu"
> but in pereq 3 it was "mishekheintah":

The Malbim gives two explanations for the differences between the two
versions of this commandment.  Not only does the first command refer
to the Jews' neighbours and lodgers, while the second refers to their
friends, but also the first mentions garments and the second doesn't.
(Also the first refers only to the women, while the second includes
the men.  The Malbim doesn't explain this difference.)

His first explanation is that the commandment changed, because the
initial plan was that they would maintain the pretense of leaving for
three days, and simply abscond with the stuff they'd borrowed.  How
could they do such a thing?  Wouldn't it be stealing?  Therefore, the
Malbim suggests, the initial plan was that they would borrow only from
their neighbours and lodgers, who were the ones who, when they didn't
return, would naturally end up inheriting their homes, fields, and
whatever hard-to-carry possessions they left behind.  In this way they
would effectively be selling their stuff to their neighbours for fair
value, albeit without their knowledge.

But then the plan changed, and Hashem said that after Makas Bechoros
the Egyptians would expel the Jews and tell them to leave and not come
back.  Thus He said to borrow from everyone they could, even those who
were not their neighbours and would not end up getting anything in return.
They would be willing to lend, because they were expecting them back;
then, when those same Egyptians, knowing that the Jews had their stuff,
told them to go and not come back, that would constitute permission to
keep all that they had borrowed.


His second explanation is that the second command does not refer to
Egyptian friends (because how would a Jew have an Egyptian friend?)
but to Jewish friends.  In order to trick the Egyptians into lending
their stuff, the poor Jews were to borrow golden and silver vessels
from their rich Jewish friends.  Thus the Egyptians would see that
the Jews' claim that they needed good stuff for their festival was
genuine, and would be willing to lend their own stuff too, in the
expectation that it would be returned afterwards.  The reason why
garments are not mentioned is that even rich people generally only
have one set of fancy festival garments (e.g. a tuxedo), so it would
not be suspicious when a poor Jew asked an Egyptian to lend him his
tuxedo, because he would understand that the rich Jews need their
tuxedoes for themselves and can't lend them out.


The Malbim also explains the juxtaposition of this command with "gam
ha'ish Moshe gadol me'od be`einei Mitzrayim".  The Mitzrim trusted
Moshe, and therefore were willing to lend their stuff to the Jews.


-- 
Zev Sero        "Natural resources are not finite in any meaningful
z...@sero.name    economic sense, mind-boggling though this assertion
                  may be. The stocks of them are not fixed but rather
                 are expanding through human ingenuity."
                                            - Julian Simon

From  http://tinyurl.com/7ap8ps5

There have been many requests to post a Halachic
response regarding the laws of chodosh/yoshon.
Baruch Hashem, Rabbi Yehuda Baum has agreed to
permit me to publicize and excerpt from his
unpublished kashrus book towards enlightening
readers as to some of the laws pertaining to this issue.

Click on the hyperlink to view the article
-
<http://www.jerusalemkoshernews.com/wp-content/uploads/chodo
sh-excerpt-from-book.pdf>chodosh-excerpt-from-book

Rabbi Yehuda Baum serves as a posek in the
Sanhedria Murchevet ? Ramat Eshkol neighborhoods
of Jerusalem. He has been a part of the Mir
Yeshiva for over 18 years, leads various kollels,
teaches in Seminaries, and is the American mohel
of the neighborhoods. In addition, he is the Rav
Hamachshir of the ?Toras HaBayis? hashgacha,
under HaGaon HaRav Yitzchak Berkovitz Shlita.

See the above URL for the rest of this article.  YL


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120205/2f9ca5dc/attachment-0001.htm>

 From http://tinyurl.com/79np84w

Please find this extremely comprehensive article by Rabbi Yehuda 
Spitz by clicking on the hyperlink; 
<http://www.jerusalemkoshernews.com/wp-content/uplo
ads/chodosh-combined-endnotes-jan-2012.doc>chodosh-combined-endnotes
-jan-2012 


See the above URL for more.  YL
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120206/90771c5d/attachment-0001.htm>

http://yeranenyaakov.blogspot.com/2012/02/please-pray-for-ra
v-elyashiv-shlita.html 

why does tfila  of talmidei chachamim /tora learners  help more than  the 
learning of  tora learners?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120206/469d1c18/attachment-0001.htm>

On Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 12:21:34PM -0800, Saul.Z.New...@kp.org wrote:
: http://yeranenyaakov.blogspot.com/2012/02/please-pray-fo
: r-rav-elyashiv-shlita.html 
: why does tfila of talmidei chachamim /tora learners help more than the
: learning of tora learners?

I think your question only works if we believe that davening and learning
operate on the same axis. Then we can rank which is bigger / further along
that axis. And so, if learning is the greater mitzvah, why would it pay to
interrupt learning for davening?

But if, OTOH, they operate in different "directions", then it could be
simply that tefillah is more appropriate for baqashos, even if learning
is more effective / important in numerous other ways.

If there are numerous ways of measuring mitzvos, that we have 613 mitzvos
because we need to be acted upon in 613 different ways (keneged rema"ch
eivarim ve-shesa"h gideihem), then "talmud Torah keneged kulam" doesn't
tell the whole story. And so tzitzis too can have "tarya"g mitzvos teluyim
bah". Or yishuv EY, or milah.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Weeds are flowers too
mi...@aishdas.org        once you get to know them.
http://www.aishdas.org          - Eeyore ("Winnie-the-Pooh" by AA Milne)
Fax: (270) 514-1507

On Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 12:21:34PM -0800, Saul.Z.New...@kp.org wrote:
: http://yeranenyaakov.blogspot.com/2012/02/please-pray-fo
: r-rav-elyashiv-shlita.html 
: why does tfila of talmidei chachamim /tora learners help more than the
: learning of tora learners?

I think your question only works if we believe that davening and learning
operate on the same axis. Then we can rank which is bigger / further along
that axis. And so, if learning is the greater mitzvah, why would it pay to
interrupt learning for davening?
.......

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
IIRC there's a tshuva by R' Moshe where he's asked about younger kids
interrupting limudei kodesh to say tehillim and he answers affirmatively.
Perhaps R' DE can supply the source (all my sfarim are piled away for some
clean up in my basement so I can't access the Yad Moshe :-)
KT
Joel Rich
THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE 
ADDRESSEE.  IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL 
INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE.  Dissemination, 
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.



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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 29, Issue 13
**************************************

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..."