Avodah Mailing List

Volume 33: Number 11

Tue, 20 Jan 2015

< Previous Next >
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Message: 1
From: via Avodah
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 16:00:29 -0500
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] Fascinating, Little Known History of a




 


On 01/18/2015 08:29 AM, Kenneth Miller via Avodah  wrote:

>
> I have seen many shuls which change this text, and  even the ArtScroll
> offers this idea in a footnote. For fear of  obligating people to give
> donations that they might not ever give, they  change the last phrase
> to "because we are praying for  him..."
>


From: Zev Sero via Avodah _avodah@lists.aishdas.org_ 
(mailto:avo...@lists.aishdas.org) 


>>It also makes little sense.  What does "because we are  praying for him"
*mean*?  We've already done the praying; the "ba'avur"  clause is a
reason why the prayer should be answered, and when you fill it in  with
"because we're asking", it's the equivalent of "for no particular  
reason".<<

 
 
 
>>>>>>
I understand that clause to mean that we're saying not just that we are  
davening for him at this moment but that we will continue to daven for that  
choleh, and in that zechus, he should please be healed.
 
But PS I have another question, something I've long wondered about but  
never got around to asking anyone.  It applies also to Yizkor, when we say  
that we will give tzedakah for the merit of the niftar.  My question is,  can 
you at that point fill in something else other than giving tzedakah,  
something specific?  Can you say, "May Hashem remember Ploni ben Ploni in  the 
zechus that I will do taharos for the chevra kadisha" or "I will volunteer  for 
bikur cholim" or "I will write an article in his memory" or "I will invite  
guests to my home who are not pleasant company but really need an invitation 
 because they're so lonely" or or or......?
 

--Toby  Katz
t6...@aol.com
..
=============


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



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20150119/12892a5a/attachment.htm>


Go to top.

Message: 2
From: Eli Turkel
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 13:35:20 +0200
Subject:
[Avodah] kiddush hashem


<< But that which people say that even if he has not given up his life
    Al Kidush Ha'Shem but he has been murdered by Akum because he is a
    Jew, he is also called 'kadosh', this is apparently 'kidushei taus'
    ... but certainly those who have been involuntarily killed, not
    through their good will to give up their lives for God and His Torah,
    even though the killing is because of hatred of Israel it is obvious
    to the Gemara that they have not reached the level that no creation
    can stand in their 'mehizah' ... but ordinary people ('beinonim')
    who were simply killed out of hatred of Israel and they did not say
    that if they violate the religion they will be saved. even though
    they receive atonement for their sins and they have risen to the
    level of servants of God, to the level of sanctifiers of God like
    the martyrs of Lod they have not reached. >>

Again, R. Elyashiv disagreed. In particular he said that the spy Ely Cohen
was a "kadosh"

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20150119/18b88804/attachment-0001.htm>


Go to top.

Message: 3
From: Zev Sero
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 16:16:53 -0500
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] Fascinating, Little Known History of a


On 01/19/2015 04:00 PM, via Avodah wrote:
> But PS I have another question, something I've long wondered about
> but never got around to asking anyone.  It applies also to Yizkor,
> when we say that we will give tzedakah for the merit of the niftar.
> My question is, can you at that point fill in something else other
> than giving tzedakah, something specific?  Can you say, "May Hashem
> remember Ploni ben Ploni in the zechus that I will do taharos for the
> chevra kadisha" or "I will volunteer for bikur cholim" or "I will
> write an article in his memory" or "I will invite guests to my home
> who are not pleasant company but really need an invitation because
> they're so lonely" or or or......?

Of course.   Most of those things *are* tzedaka, in person rather than
with money.   But even a mitzvah other than tzedaka is fine, e.g. I will
learn so many prakim of mishnayos, or blatt gemara, or whatever.  It's
just that shul gaba'im naturally prompt people to fill in the blank with
a nedava to the shul, and those who print up yizkor pamphlets prompt
people to give to their institution, etc.  So usually nobody suggests
other options.





Go to top.

Message: 4
From: Eli Turkel
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 13:28:17 +0200
Subject:
[Avodah] beit yosef algorithm


<The Beit Yosef in his introduction provides his algorithm for arriving at
psak. The first step is to look at Rambam, Rif and Rosh and go by the
majority.  He then states what to do in cases where one of the 3 has no
opinion etc.   I was wondering if anyone has ever done a study of all or a
subset of the Beit Yosef's rulings to see what percentage of the rulings
support the claimed algorithm.   I have a specific example in mind where
all 3 of the amudim omit a particular requirement/ruling and yet the Beit
Yosef follows the Tur who does quote/require  the ruling.>

It is said that the CI had several cases where the SA did not follow this
algorithm

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20150119/40d9784d/attachment-0001.htm>


Go to top.

Message: 5
From: Eli Turkel
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 13:15:00 +0200
Subject:
[Avodah] conquest of EY by Yehoshua


> But in recent years I have heard that in this context, "all" really means
> "most" (as it is said, "rubo k'kulo"), and that many halachos will take on
> d'Oraisa aspects in the very near future - even according to the Rambam -
> when most of the world's Jews will live in Israel. IF this is true, then
> *perhaps* the answer two RET's question is that even conquering *most* of
> the Land was sufficient for these halachos to apply.

If this is so then shmitta in particular should already be deoraisa since
present medina occupies most of halachic EY (assuming you count
yehuda&shomron which formally is not annexed)


[Email #2 -micha]

> But to answer the initial question, the first 7 years were general
> conquest. There were certainly hold-outs who needed to be rooted out,
> and that was presumably the remaining 7 years.

> In terms of the question "How did Chatzor become an independent
> Canaanite city at the time of Devorah?", well, we misbehaved. That's how.
> Even during the second 7 years, we only took possession of the land.
> There would have been hold-outs in the hills. During invasions of other
> nations, due to our misbehavior, they would have been able to reclaim
> Chatzor. Possibly with Egyptian help, given that the head of their armed
> forces had a distinctively Egyptian sounding name.

Just to point out that in several cases (including Devorah!) after the Jews
conqureed the Caanaites they allowed them to say and pay taxes. By
Devorah the pasuk emphatically tells us "Ve-horish lo horish" They didnt
drive out the Caananites. Similarly Naftali didnt expel the inhabitants
of Katron and Nahalol.
Menashe did not conquer much of its territory including Bet Shaan, Dor,
Taanach and Megiddo
basically an entire strip west to east at the northern end of Menashe.

The Philistines were in Gaza
Thus in fact during most of the period of the shoftim the Jews and
Caananites lived together in the land and the change during the period
was who was in charge and who paid taxes to whom.

-- 
Eli Turkel



Go to top.

Message: 6
From: Micha Berger
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 16:23:45 -0500
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] Fascinating, Little Known History of a


On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 04:00:29PM -0500, via Avodah wrote:
: that we will give tzedakah for the merit of the niftar. My question is, can 
: you at that point fill in something else other than giving tzedakah, 
: something specific? Can you say, "May Hashem remember Ploni ben Ploni in the 
: zechus that I will do taharos for the chevra kadisha" or "I will volunteer for 
: bikur cholim" or "I will write an article in his memory" or "I will invite 
: guests to my home who are not pleasant company but really need an invitation 
: because they're so lonely" or or or......?

My feeling is that for a mitzvah to benefit another, the other person
had to have a hand in causing the mitzvah. They get the zekhus of their
role in your mitzvah. (Even if that role is just their being a choleh
for whom you are motivated to do something.)

To commit mitzvos you would have done otherwise ("in the zekhus I will
do taharos") is iffy in my eyes. Unless you're invoking the zekhus as a
merit for one of the people who taught you or motivated you to perform
the taharah.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Education is not the filling of a bucket,
mi...@aishdas.org        but the lighting of a fire.
http://www.aishdas.org                - W.B. Yeats
Fax: (270) 514-1507



Go to top.

Message: 7
From: Allan Engel
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 22:55:56 +0000
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] Fascinating, Little Known History of a


We're told that causing the Kehilla to respond to Barechu or Kedusha (or
Kaddish) brings merit to a deceased parent. If the Kehilla was going to do
this anyway (ie if someone other than the Avel was Ba'al Tefilla) what is
the 'added bonus' that accrues to the deceased?

On 19 January 2015 at 21:23, Micha Berger via Avodah <
avo...@lists.aishdas.org> wrote:
>
>
> To commit mitzvos you would have done otherwise ("in the zekhus I will
> do taharos") is iffy in my eyes. Unless you're invoking the zekhus as a
> merit for one of the people who taught you or motivated you to perform
> the taharah.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20150119/67930761/attachment.htm>


Go to top.

Message: 8
From: Micha Berger
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 18:05:15 -0500
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] Fascinating, Little Known History of a


On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 10:55:56PM +0000, Allan Engel wrote:
: We're told that causing the Kehilla to respond to Barechu or Kedusha (or
: Kaddish) brings merit to a deceased parent. If the Kehilla was going to do
: this anyway (ie if someone other than the Avel was Ba'al Tefilla) what is
: the 'added bonus' that accrues to the deceased?

Well, in the ideal only one person is supposed to be saying Qaddish at
a time. Which is certainly the case for Barekhu. And Yekkes held to the
original.

When we discussed why the suboptimal norm of every aveil saying it
together became commonplace
http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/getindex.cgi?section=S#SAYING%20
KADDISH%20TOGETHER
R RIch Wolpoe suggested that perhaps LORs noticed how for many men,
showing up to minyan to say Qaddish for 11 months turns into a habit
and starts a life of much better shul attendance.

And whatever extra attendances the aveil is pushed to get to shul for
are extra mitzvos that wouldn't have happened without the niftar.

But I don't think we can analyze the practice of all the aveilim saying
Qaddish together as though it's what Qaddish is all about.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             One who kills his inclination is as though he
mi...@aishdas.org        brought an offering. But to bring an offering,
http://www.aishdas.org   you must know where to slaughter and what
Fax: (270) 514-1507      parts to offer.        - R' Simcha Zissel Ziv



Go to top.

Message: 9
From: Kenneth Miller
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 02:06:50 GMT
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] Fascinating, Little Known History of a


R' Micha Berger wrote:

> To commit mitzvos you would have done otherwise ("in the zekhus
> I will do taharos") is iffy in my eyes. Unless you're invoking
> the zekhus as a merit for one of the people who taught you or
> motivated you to perform the taharah.

There are stories of tzadikim who do a mitzvah with so much "lishmah" that
they decline the s'char for the mitzvah, and offer it to someone else. I
can imagine that this sharing of zechus might work similarly: The mitzvah
that I normally get s'char for, this time I am am assigning it to someone
else.

R' Allan Engel wrote:
> We're told that causing the Kehilla to respond to Barechu or
> Kedusha (or Kaddish) brings merit to a deceased parent. If the
> Kehilla was going to do this anyway (ie if someone other than the
> Avel was Ba'al Tefilla) what is the 'added bonus' that accrues to
> the deceased?

It's not an *added* bonus. Rather it is being *redirected*. The merit which usually goes to the Chazan, this time it is going to the mourner's parent.

Akiva Miller
____________________________________________________________
Odd Trick Fights Diabetes
&#34;Unique&#34; Proven Method To Control Blood Sugar In 3 Weeks. Watch Video.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/54bdb84e9e642384e3466st04vuc



Go to top.

Message: 10
From: Rabbi Meir G. Rabi
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 16:07:09 +1100
Subject:
[Avodah] Metzitza on Shabbos, Beris in the Midbar


 This a collection of a number of short responses

What are the Halachic medical issues or suspect medical issues, which are
not recognised by our modern medical experts - for which R Kenneth says, we
are nevertheless instructed by Halacha to be Mechallel Shabbos?
According to R Kenneth there are MANY cases where Chazal's view of medicine
differs from that of today's physicians
yes, that is true
BUT we are looking to see which of those ARE STILL TODAY ECLIPSING SHABBOS
and please R Kenneth provide some facts - WHO are the Poskim who disagree?
+++++

I ask those who suggest that Metz is part of the Mitzvah and therefore is
to be performed on Shabbos, to show HALACHIC support for their position.

So far they have failed, advancing only the following unsatisfactory
arguments
1) many people do it
2) it has been done for a long time
3) Kabbalah is a Halachic source [and we do not mean to promote a Minhag
but to be Mechallel Shabbos]

Cerainly some Poskim hold it is Muttar on Shabbos but we need to see and
understand their proof
Please present any Halachic arguments to be Mattir.
So far none have been presented.
The Diyuk in the RaMBaM - has no substance as I explained - and my proof
for this is that whenever it is presented, it requires backup and
enforcement of a big name, the great Rabbi who said it. That's not proof -
that is religious coercion threatening that if you dont accept this then
you are an Apikores, or as some have attempted to brand and coerce me, MeGaleh
Panim BeHalacha.
A real proof is able to stand on its own. It does not require artificial
Hocus Pocus support from big name rabbis or intimidation.
+++++

The CS in allowing use of a sponge, is CLEARLY defying the process of
Metzitza which requires MiMeKOmos HaRechokim - that the blood be drawn from
the extremities of the organ which cannot be done with a sponge. Also using
a sponge avoids Chillul Shabbos.

One cannot accept R Michas proof that CS holds that Metz is a part of the
Mitzva. Does anyone seriously consider various interpretations and
comparisons, made by CS of the word Metzitzah "mitz apayim" (Mishlei 30:31)
and "vayamatz tal min hagizah" (Shofetim 6:38) to be Halachic proof?

If CS wanted us know he thinks it is part of the Mitzvah, why did he not
say so?
+++++

Kabbalah is not a Halachic proof. It cannot be Mattir Chillul Shabbos. At
the most it is employed by those inclined, to support various customs that
are neither here nor there.

In Halachic discussions which determine if we are or are not Mechallel
Shabbos, no Posek attributes weight to the Zohar unless it supports an
already established Halachic position. If you disagree please bring proofs.
+++++

I suggested that Moshe Rabbenmu approved the decision to not have Beris in
the Midbar due to health risks. Isaac's response about Sheidim and
Ruchniyus is irrelevant, a decoy. It really makes not the slightest
difference WHY it was believed that there was a danger to perform Beris in
the Midbar, The Halacha they followed was predicated upon their
understanding of the facts: there was a danger so they did not perform
Beris.

We do not need to understand or reach any conclusions about the Sheidim or
how they materialise or what they look like. Any discussion about such is
just a diversion, as is the extraordinary length of those postings in
response to my simple, clear and concise argument.
+++++

It is difficult to have a discussion if the Qs I ask are distorted and then
dismissed
for example - I did not ask for proof of Shedim. I dont care if others do
or do not believe in Sheidim and it makes no difference to our discussion.
+++++

And here are the reasons offered to prove that we CANNOT conclude any
Halocho from the Yidden not having Beris in the Midbar.
1) If it was a normal Sakono, why did Shevet Levi perform Beris?
well that is no proof, I think we can readily suggest that Shevet Levi went
LMHaDin, they performed Beris when they were in fact exempt.
How was it permitted if it is a Sakana to the infant?
Presumably, it was not a clear Sakana, as are many medical issues where
expert opinion is divided.

2) The Pasuk in Koheles 11:2 the Mila in the Midbar was on day SEVEN. Only
when they reached the Kedusha of SHMINI which is in Eretz HaKodesh, did it
revert to the higher level (as per Maharal and others of 8)
I really think this is grasping at straws - are we to be Mechallel Shabbos
based on some Drush?

If there is any proof from the Psikta DeRav Cahana then I suggest Isaac
please explain it.

Isaac asks, how were BNY Makriv Korbonos as Arelim?
Nice question - but what does it prove?
Anyway, maybe THAT was the HoRoAs ShaAh.

and Isaacs reassurance that it is all discussed by Meforshim does not add
any meaning or clarity to our discussion.
+++++

Another apparent diversion = The Machlokes whether Periyah may be performed
by a second person.
Permit me to briefly explain this: it is between the Mechaber who forbids
and the Rema who permits: it is a Machlokes if Milah is Doche or Mattir
Shabbos. If it is Doche Shabbos then we can not permit Chillul Shabbos
unless that same person COMPLETES the Mitzvah; cutting the foreskin without
also removing the membrane is Chillul Shabbos, even if someone else
completes the Mitzvah.

The Rema however, explains that Beris is Mattir Shabbos and therefore every
part of the Mitzvah, even if not completed by that person is permitted.
Either way, it has nothing to do with the fact that in the Midbar we did
not perform Beris and that we may assume this was with the approval of
Moshe Rabbenu.
+++++

I do not understand why and what is Isaacs point in asking - Would there
not be a Chiyuv to continuously inquire, throughout the 40 years, if they
may have a Beris today? Does anyone think this was going on?
and is Isaacs astonishment - Is anyone seriously suggesting that the Novi
himself didn't declare a HoroAs ShoOh of sorts? - adequate proof that it
was not a Halachic decision?

BTW Did Moshe Rabbenu issue TWO HoRoAs ShoOh, one for Shevet Levi that they
may perform Beris and one for the others that they need not?
+++++

and a further digression offered by contributors -
even if Metzitzah is part of the Chiyuv, it is LeChatChila. Without Metz
the baby is Mahul and may eat Korban Pesach, etc...

Here is what is missing
No one commented on the Reb Elchonon I quoted
No one commented on the Ran I clarified
so no one made any comment about any of the substance of the discussion
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20150120/6066abd6/attachment.htm>


Go to top.

Message: 11
From: Micha Berger
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 06:21:39 -0500
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] Fascinating, Little Known History of a


On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 11:11:25PM +0000, Allan Engel wrote:
: My question is, if ten people gather for a minyan, whether the sheliach
: tzibbur is the aveil or not, barechu and kedusha will be said, so what
: ADDED zechus has been created that could be a benefit for the niftar?

Esther save the Jewish people. It is surely to her merit, no? Even if
otherwise "revach vehatzalah yavo layhudim mimaqom acheir?" In practice,
the fact that she was the one there to be the cause Hashem used is
something major.

I would say the same here. Yes, the "amein" would have been said in
response to anoher chazan. But in reality, this niftar's son was the
one who stood up and did it.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             "Man wants to achieve greatness overnight,
mi...@aishdas.org        and he wants to sleep well that night too."
http://www.aishdas.org         - Rav Yosef Yozel Horwitz, Alter of Novarodok
Fax: (270) 514-1507



Go to top.

Message: 12
From: Micha Berger
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 13:58:12 -0500
Subject:
[Avodah] Getting along with the in-laws


So, there appears to be a machloqes over whether it's typical to get
along with your in-laws.

The case the Ahs (OC 371:2) discusses is when one of the residents
of the courtyard didn't participate in the eruv but is away for
Shabbos. If he is a guest out of town, he isn't an issue (se'if 1).
If it's in town:

If he went to his home one courtyard over, if he has no intent to
return on Shabbos, he doesn't prohibit the chatzeir for them.

The gemara (Eiruvin 86a) says that if he goes to his daughter's house
and has no intent to return, the eiruv is okay.

The Tur writes that this is only his daughter's house, ubt if he
goes to his son's home, the eiruv is pasul. Because a spat with the
daughter-in-law that sends him back home is too likely.

The Rambam (Eiruvin 4) omits the law, the AhS assumes (and understand
the MM as making this point) because the thing about a daughter's house
is just the most likely situation. And one can't be medayeiq.

It's not in the BY either.

And the Ahs invokes "halkhah kedivrei hameiqil be'eiruv".

(When I saw the Tur's shitah I literally LOLed, leaving the other
people on the subway staring at me.)

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


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



_______________________________________________
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.)


< Previous Next >