Avodah Mailing List

Volume 32: Number 112

Wed, 23 Jul 2014

• 1. Re: flat earth (Micha Berger)
• 2. Re: woen wearing Tefillin - Arukh Hashulchan (Kenneth Miller)
• 3. Re: the International Dateline and the shape of the earth (Avi Goldstein)
• 4. Re: the International Dateline and the shape of the earth (Zev Sero)
• 5. Re: the International Dateline and the shape of the earth (Micha Berger)
• 6. Re: the International Dateline and the shape of the earth (Zev Sero)
• 7. Re: the International Dateline and the shape of the earth (Arie Folger)
• 8. Re: When is a Gezeira Made? (H Lampel)
• 9. Re: the International Dateline and the shape of the earth (Micha Berger)
• 10. Re: the International Dateline and the shape of the earth (Zev Sero)
• 11. Re: When is a Gezeira Made? (Rich, Joel)
• 12. flat earth (Eli Turkel)
• 13. Re: flat earth (Micha Berger)
• 14. Re: woen wearing Tefillin - Arukh Hashulchan (Micha Berger)

To continue what I wrote earlier this evening, I'm bothered by our
framing this as Rashi or R' Tam vs the latest science.

If it were Daniel, perhaps we could speak of the latest science. By
Rebbe's day, the geocentric universe was a given in the Roman Empire,
while other cultures had their own pet theory. One of those cultures is
the Bavel of the Talmud Bavli, but we're discussing a gemara with Rebbe.

By the time we get to Rashi, no one literate in the Western World thought
the world was flat.

And it's not just the "Rationalists" who bought into Aristo who would
believe this. I don't know when that part of the Zohar was written
(you might recall I'm convinced of RYEmden's accreation theory), but it
presumes this model as well. (Eg Vayiqra 10a -- "kol yishuva misgalgala
be'igula kekadur".) The astrology from that period is also geocentric,
rather than the planets go behind the sky when they're not out.

Then there is the Y-mi AZ 3:1, already cited by RYGB, in which Alexander
flew on eagleback so high he saw the world was round.

I therefore have huge problems believing that Rabbeinu Tam didn't know
the science involved, or even that there is a mesoretic basis for keeping
an open mind. Maybe it's just the limits of my imagination.

--


hashmashos.

--


Moshe and Yehoshua. "Tein meihodekha alav" is the prooftext that Moshe's
face was like that of the sun, and Yehoshua's of the moon. However,
in Persian astronomy, the light of the moon is not reflective of the
sun -- the moon shines even when it is within the sky and the sun is
blocked on the outside. So, while the Chazal sounds like they're saying
"meihodekha" means reflected glory, it wouldn't mean that unless we
assume the author of the medrash believed in something more geocentric
(or even baryocentric).

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.

R' Micha Berger wrote:

> The AhS would be consistent with a Michal bas Sha'ul,
> post-menopausal, wearing tefillin while engaged in mitzvah.

Most poskim talk about women not knowing *how* to stay clean, and I think some phrased it in terms of not being *able* to stay clean.

I've always wondered what makes women different from men in this regard. It
is very easy to jump to conclusions and say that men do not menstruate, but
it is possible that there is some other difference involved. Do any poskim
explicitly tie this lack of cleanliness to nidah?

Akiva Miller
____________________________________________________________
Odd Carb-Hormone Trick
1 EASY tip to increase fat-burning, lower blood sugar & decrease fat storage
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/53cdd1f76b2b551f778best04vuc

Zev Sero wrote:
> It was obvious to everyone at the time, including Chazal, that the whole Yishuv
> (the landmass that was thought to cover most of the upper hemisphere) was all
> on the same calendar, and that one who circumnavigated the globe would have
> to change dates when he reached the opposite shore of the Yishuv.  If there
> was to be a specific line where the date changed, it must be somewhere in the
> Yam which made up the bottom hemisphere.  It simply didn't matter where in that
> yam the line was drawn, or indeed that it should be drawn at some specific place.

> The Baal Hamaor was no different.  He assumed that the line was drawn at the
> eastern edge of the Yishuv, but he also assumed that there was nothing beyond
> that line until you got to the western edge of the Yishuv.  It seemed to him
> that the whole yam belonged with the west, rather than splitting it in the
> middle or in some other place.  But this was completely theoretical to him.
> He wasn't paskening lehalacha, because it wasn't relevant to any halacha.

Zev, I am unsure what you mean when you say "it was obvious to everyone."
Do you mean it was obvious and they were wrong or it was obvious and they
were right? For they most certainly were not right; just to clarify, even
if there was no life at the time in the lower hemisphere (indeed, there was
life, but just for the granting of the argument), everyone in the upper
hemisphere is not on the same date.

Thus, it very mush does matter where the dateline was drawn; the fact that
Chazal did not draw a dateline indicates that they did not know one existed.

Avi Goldstein

On 22/07/2014 12:59 AM, Avi Goldstein wrote:
> Zev Sero wrote:
>> It was obvious to everyone at the time, including Chazal, that the whole Yishuv
>> (the landmass that was thought to cover most of the upper hemisphere) was all
>> on the same calendar, and that one who circumnavigated the globe would have
>> to change dates when he reached the opposite shore of the Yishuv.  If there
>> was to be a specific line where the date changed, it must be somewhere in the
>> Yam which made up the bottom hemisphere.  It simply didn't matter where in that
>> yam the line was drawn, or indeed that it should be drawn at some specific place.

> Zev, I am unsure what you mean when you say "it was obvious to
> everyone." Do you mean it was obvious and they were wrong or it was
> obvious and they were right?

Well, obviously we know that their information was incomplete.  But this was
how they thought of the world, and they thought it completely obvious.

> For they most certainly were not right;
> just to clarify, even if there was no life at the time in the lower
> hemisphere (indeed, there was life, but just for the granting of the
> argument), everyone in the upper hemisphere is not on the same date.

Um, what?  Of course they are.   According to current international convention
*and* according to every serious shita in halacha that I've ever heard of.

> Thus, it very mush does matter where the dateline was drawn; the fact
> that Chazal did not draw a dateline indicates that they did not know
> one existed.

Please explain why it mattered where the dates changed, why "in the lower
hemisphere" was not precise enough.

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

On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 12:59:31AM -0400, Avi Goldstein via Avodah wrote:
: Thus, it very mush does matter where the dateline was drawn; the fact that
: Chazal did not draw a dateline indicates that they did not know one existed.

The whole reason why people like Magellan and Columnbus are remembered
is because it Chazal's day, it wasn't an issue.

I think we might even argue against placing the date line in front of
Japan or New Zealand by the fact that no one knew of a land you could
get to by crossing the halachic date line.

But that's different than having a model of the universe in which there
wasn't one.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

On 22/07/2014 6:49 AM, Micha Berger wrote:
>
> I think we might even argue against placing the date line in front of
> Japan or New Zealand by the fact that no one knew of a land you could
> get to by crossing the halachic date line.

That's not a viable argument, because if so we should say the same for America!

-- 
Zev Sero             Sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable
z...@sero.name        from malice.
                                                          - Eric Raymond

RMB wrote:
> My general bent in this conversation is that our rabbis generally
> accepted the leading secular science. Nearly all, up until the 19th
> cent counter-reformation, when shitos that promoted digging in our
> heals becamea more popular position than they were. At that point
> it declined, but still dominant.

In my last post I reported asking a science historian about how prevalent
flat earth scientists used to be and how early a spherical earth became
common knowledge. His response meanwhile reached me. He explains that the
spherical earth has been well known for far longer than we think, and that
it was Enlightenment thinkers who tried to make the Mediaevals look silly
by claiming they all believed in a flat earth, However, it isn't possible
to give general cutoff dates, and regarding what Rabbenu Tam may or may not
have known, learned, heard or believed, a very detailed analysis of not
only his writings, but his milieu and correspondents would be in order.

OOf course, Chazal are Pre-Mediaeval, so we can still argue an awful lot
about their beliefs.

FWIW, I find RMB to be very sensible when he declared that not all of
Chazal needed to believe the same things here. Also, I disagree with the
poster who claimed the Yerushalmi merely means that the ball held in the
idol's hand was a sign of dominion. Those who portrayed Atlas with a ball
in his hand imagined that to be an accurate depiction of the world.

As to RAM's question why people didn't fear rolling off the sides, I am not
sure it was all that precisely analyzed in all its glory, but by
aristotelian physics, people and things simply "belonged" on earth,
regardless of direction.

KNLAD


-- 
Arie Folger,
Recent blog posts on http://ariefolger.wordpress.com/
* Wie entstand und was bedeutet der bevorstehender Fastentag des 17. Tammus
* Do Not Forget, Do Not Shove it Under the Carpet
* ORD-Seminar in Regensburg
* Nach welchem Prinzip sind die f?nf B?cher Mose organisiert?
* R?ckblick auf Limmud.de
* In the Paris Jewish community, more women than men are recalcitrant
spouses.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20140722/c9bca90a/attachment-0001.htm>

> Fri, 18 Jul 2014 11:40:44 -0400 From: Micha Berger
> Subject: [Avodah] When is a Gezeira Made?
>
>
> I suggested ... taqanos were only made in
> response to actual incidents. ... And no one responded
> to my request for backing.
I did:

  Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2005 23:12:08 -0400
From: "Zvi Lampel" <hlam...@thejnet.com>
Subject: Re: Avodah V15 #57


Wed, 20 Jul 2005 R' Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org> posted
>> I therefore surmise that
>> gezeiros were in reaction to actual violations, rather than chazal's risk
>> analysis. This reduces my question to asking qashas (qushyos) on a maaseh.
>> But it would work a lot better if someone actually says this. Anyone
>> heard of such an idea?

> Yes. The Maharatz Chayos in his M'vo HaTalmud (English: Students Guide
> Through The Talmud, p. 72).

...which is daf 301 in Kol Kisvei Maharatz Chayos (Yerushalaim 5718).

Zvi Lampel



---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 11:31:21AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote:
: >I think we might even argue against placing the date line in front of
: >Japan or New Zealand by the fact that no one knew of a land you could
: >get to by crossing the halachic date line.
: 
: That's not a viable argument, because if so we should say the same
: for America!

Roman traders reached Java in the early amoraic period.

And the Radhanim, a Jewish clan from Persia were trading with the far
east during the entire geonic period. So the question would have been
not only thinkable, but halakhah lemaaseh. (If they were observant.)
See the map at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radhanite -- that's c 870
CE.

Whereas I took it for granted they were ignorant of the Americas.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Every child comes with the message
mi...@aishdas.org        that God is not yet discouraged with
http://www.aishdas.org   humanity.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                   - Rabindranath Tagore

On 22/07/2014 6:41 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 11:31:21AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote:
> : >I think we might even argue against placing the date line in front of
> : >Japan or New Zealand by the fact that no one knew of a land you could
> : >get to by crossing the halachic date line.

> : That's not a viable argument, because if so we should say the same
> : for America!

> Roman traders reached Java in the early amoraic period.
>
> And the Radhanim, a Jewish clan from Persia were trading with the far
> east during the entire geonic period. So the question would have been
> not only thinkable, but halakhah lemaaseh. (If they were observant.)
> See the map at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radhanite -- that's c 870 CE.

Java is on the upper hemisphere lechol hade'os.  And the article on the
Radhanites makes no mention of Japan.  It seems perfectly plausible to
me that Chazal and the Rishonim were as ignorant of Japan's existence
and location as they were of America's.

-- 
Zev Sero             Sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable
z...@sero.name        from malice.
                                                          - Eric Raymond

>> I therefore surmise that
>> gezeiros were in reaction to actual violations, rather than chazal's risk
>> analysis. This reduces my question to asking qashas (qushyos) on a maaseh.
>> But it would work a lot better if someone actually says this. Anyone
>> heard of such an idea?

> Yes. The Maharatz Chayos in his M'vo HaTalmud (English: Students Guide
> Through The Talmud, p. 72).

...which is daf 301 in Kol Kisvei Maharatz Chayos (Yerushalaim 5718).

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I had always filled in the blanks as follows:
Chazal had a concern about a risk that they perceived as a miyut hamatzui
or something that probably needed guarding against.  They used an actual
incident to trigger the guard.
Or  They used an actual incident to trigger analysis of   a risk that they 
had not thought about but now perceived as a miyut hamatzui or something
that probably needed guarding against.
Not a 1 in a million anecdotal evidence


Lhavdil - is the risk of a Hamas rocket on Ben Gurion more or less than it was a week ago?

She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu and may we hear besorot tovot

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.

<< the time we get to Rashi, no one literate in the Western World thought
the world was flat.>>

I am tired of repeating the same arguments that dont get answered.
It is easy ti generalize and say no literate person thought the world was
flat when we have no way of knowing such general facts.
In fact achronim hundreds of years later insisted the world was flat and
the astronomers were wrong as proved by the gemara.

<<Then there is the Y-mi AZ 3:1, already cited by RYGB, in which Alexander
flew on eagleback so high he saw the world was round >>

Again generalizing picking and choosing. There are several other gemarot
that show that some of Chazal believed the world was flat. Continually
quoting the gemara in AZ proves that some rabbis knew of a spherical world.
The same generalization to
qttempt to show that therefore all chazal knew it. Again some achronim
disagreed with your conclusion

<<I therefore have huge problems believing that Rabbeinu Tam didn't know
the science involved>>

Again instead of issuing generalizations look at the statements of RT
himself.
While you have problems with believing it RT insists that the chachmei
Yisrael were correct against the chachmei ha-olam and explains away the
contrary gemera. He certainly gives no hint that the world is spherical.
The gemara talks about mayim she-lanu for baking chametz on the assumption
that the sun goes below the earth at night. Makes sense only for a flat
earth.
At night the sun is below (above?) Australia and not heating the waters of
EY.

Again RT on the shekia talks about "mils" but I will translate to minutes.
RT talks about one long shekia that lasts 72 (or 96) minutes (depending on
the ratio of mil to minute) - see sefer of Beinisch
There is no hint in RT where in the globe this holds.. If this is in EY or
Bavel it is factually wrong. If it is in France - why would the gemara
refer to northern Europe.

As Beinisch proves in practice communties in Southern Europe never followed
Rabbenu Tam even though many sefardi rishonim followed RT. The late shekia
started in practice (not theory) only much later in northern Europe where a
72 minute shekia made physical sense. Then Minchat Cohen introduced the
idea of the shekia depending on latitude but this occurs many years after
RT>

I suggest that the discussion focus on facts rather thab geberalizations
that cant be checked and on gut feelings of what rishonim musy have known.

The Rash on kilyaim claims that the theorem of Pythagoras is wrong in
general.
Using Micha's logic all literate people knew Pythagoras' theorem and
therefore the Rash couldnt have said it - except that he did.
Using this logic one can prove whatever one wants to
-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20140724/353bb2dc/attachment-0001.htm>

On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 12:19:06AM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote:
: << the time we get to Rashi, no one literate in the Western World thought
: the world was flat.>>
: 
: I am tired of repeating the same arguments that dont get answered.
: It is easy ti generalize and say no literate person thought the world was
: flat when we have no way of knowing such general facts.

Of course we do, there is an entire discipline of studying the history
of science. Western theories were well beyond this.

: In fact achronim hundreds of years later insisted the world was flat and
: the astronomers were wrong as proved by the gemara.

But they're not westerners, at least not in this sense -- they're
basing themselves on shas, not western civ. As I said above, and I
through was clear from the substance of my argument, my claim was about
western science, not chazal. I am willing to explore whether Tosafos had
hashkafic reasons to reject western science, but I find it improbable
next to impossible that he was ignorant of an idea that was already
dominant in the surrounding society since Rebbe's day.

However, they are more basing themselves on the dangers of playing fast
and loose with mesorah as highlighted by the reformists. Acharonim from
the counter-reformation or after doesn't prove what the norms were in R'
Tam's day.

: <<Then there is the Y-mi AZ 3:1, already cited by RYGB, in which Alexander
: flew on eagleback so high he saw the world was round >>

: Again generalizing picking and choosing. There are several other gemarot
: that show that some of Chazal believed the world was flat...

That the sun went above the sky. Not necessarily that the world was
flat. But again, I'm arguing more against ignorance than his actual
position. I can not prove my belief that Rabbeinu Tam himself believed
in the Copernican universe, but I think I did prove that if he didn't,
it involved active rejection.

My own belief that it is most likely he held that Rebbe thought the
earth was under the shell of the sky, but not necessarily flat. Nor
that he himself rejected the Copernican universe.

: At night the sun is below (above?) Australia and not heating the waters of
: EY.

Below Australia, according to Persian science, boiling up the water the
world floats on. Which would heat the waters of EY.

(But again, that's Rebbe, not Rabbeinu Tam. RT can explain a gemara
without personally believing its version of science.)

: Again RT on the shekia talks about "mils" but I will translate to minutes.
: RT talks about one long shekia that lasts 72 (or 96) minutes (depending on
: the ratio of mil to minute) - see sefer of Beinisch
: There is no hint in RT where in the globe this holds.. If this is in EY or
: Bavel it is factually wrong. If it is in France - why would the gemara
: refer to northern Europe.

The gemara doesn't refer to 4 mil. RT translated the gemara into 4 mil.
The idea was floated that this translation involved shifting from Bavel
to N France, but if you recall, I do not know how that translation would
be even in the right ballpark.

: As Beinisch proves in practice communties in Southern Europe never followed
: Rabbenu Tam even though many sefardi rishonim followed RT...

Which would actually be according to RT, if he was translating based
on longitude.

: The Rash on kilyaim claims that the theorem of Pythagoras is wrong in
: general.
: Using Micha's logic all literate people knew Pythagoras' theorem and
: therefore the Rash couldnt have said it...

Well, to parallel my actual thesis, the Rosh had to have actively rejected
it, rather than been ignorant. Which is what his words actually say.

In any case, Pythagoras's theorem doesn't work in practice with real
fields and human-drawn lines. Relying on it to plan a field is of limited
value. (The difference between theory and practice is that in theory,
there would be no difference.)

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

On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 02:51:30AM +0000, Kenneth Miller via Avodah wrote:
:> The AhS would be consistent with a Michal bas Sha'ul,
:> post-menopausal, wearing tefillin while engaged in mitzvah.

: Most poskim talk about women not knowing *how* to stay clean, and I
: think some phrased it in terms of not being *able* to stay clean.
: 
: I've always wondered what makes women different from men in this regard...
: It is very easy to jump to conclusions and say that men do not menstruate...

The idea that that menopause would be part of a matir is in the Olas
Tamid 38:4.

It is possible that it's not necessarily different. Even if neither can
do a sufficient job at keeping a guf naqi, women who aren't obligated
to wear tefillin shouldn't try what they can't fully succeed at. And
you're taking the "they can't fully succeed at" of my prior sentence and
reading it as though there was an "unlike men". That's how I would read
the Eishel Avraham (by the Peri Megaim) on the Magein Avraham 38:3.

The AhS, the person I discussed in the bit you quote compared women
not wearing tefillin to men not wearing tefillin more than davening and
perhaps a select few could also add a seder after davening. He is not
asserting they're different.

I just threw in the OT's point about menopause to actually level the
playing field on a metzi'us level. There is more indication that the AhS
didn't say it was about menstruation, since (1) he holds the situations
are equal between men and women, and (2) he holds up Elisha ba'al
kenafayim as the paragon of quf naqi. The latter (#2) implies that RYME
holds of the psychological take on guf naqi.

The AhS is at OC 38:6 <http://j.mp/1nhLctm>.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             For those with faith there are no questions.
mi...@aishdas.org        For those who lack faith there are no answers.
http://www.aishdas.org                     - Rav Yaakov of Radzimin
Fax: (270) 514-1507


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



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


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


***************************************

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..."


A list of common acronyms is available at
        http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/acronyms.cgi
(They are also visible in the web archive copy of each digest.)