Avodah Mailing List

Volume 43: Number 32

Sat, 31 May 2025

• 1. Atonement via proxy - SaIr HaMishtaleAch (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi)
• 2. kol shehu (Joel Rich)
• 3. moral frameworks (Joel Rich)
• 4. Re: moral frameworks (Micha Berger)
• 5. Re: gaal yisrael (Yisrael Herczeg)
• 6. timtum halev (Joel Rich)
• 7. Eilu Veilu (Joel Rich)
• 8. The census numbers in bamidbar (Marty Bluke)

On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 07:44:20AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote:
What is the rationale behind all kinds of serious aveiros that one has no
regret for, and doesn't repent
and yet comes Yom Kippur all is forgiven.
How does that make any sense?

Perhaps we may consider -
We find the same in reverse with the death of the Cohen Gadol releasing
those in the Arei Miklat
The Gemara indicates that the CG is responsible [to some extent] for the
death
Of he who was killed inadvertently
And also those incarcerated
who were provided with gifts to not pray for the death of the CG
Apparently the CG is also responsible [to some extent] for those locked up
Had he performed to his full capacity
This CG could have averted the tragedy of both the one who was killed and
the one who is locked up

Aharon HaCohen stopped the plague
How did his Avodah save those who deserved to die?

How did Pinches save the Yidden
Seforno suggests, their sin was standing by in silence when Z took Kossbi
Here too their silence when witnessing Pinches action was an atonement
But that does not reflect upon Aharon?s quelling the plague.

HaYesh Bo Eitz Im Ayin
Is there a righteous person in Canaan who might save the inhabitants
And frustrate BNY war to conquer EY

Those who wield influence are charged with employing it to help
And if they do not they are held accountable.
The world stands by in silence
At least those who do not actively condemn the Yidden
How culpable are they
What does this illuminate of their character and honour

Asher Nasi Yachatah
WHEN the leader will sin, REALLY
Rather, Ashrei HaDor [Rashi]
A generation that has leaders who take responsibility
Is a fortunate [Hirsch forward striving] generation

If we witness a child being slapped by an adult
We may safely assume that adult is a parent
If the parent fails to direct their child
They are accountable
perhaps for a lifetime of poor behaviour

Perhaps, HKBH accepts the commitment of the CG
To wield his influence to bring the people, the sinners
Back to HKBH
AAvinu Davenned for Avimelech after he expressed some remorse
It seems his Teffilos helped avert a consequence that was coming their way


R Micha suggests that after the se'ir hamishtaleiach
 they still said vidui, they still held ne'ilah.
Which means they were NOT forgiven
We too say VeHu Rachum when beginning MaAriv after YK

Not saying Viduy is flaunting
rather than expressing gratitude and celebrating
Akin to YaAkob Avinu saying Katonti Mikol HaChassadim

When the Rambam (Teshuvah 1:3) writes,
"atzmo shel Yom haKippurim mechapeir leshavim".

He is referring to when there is no SaIr HaMishtaleAch
with the SaIr he clearly says it atones for Kalos even when the sinners
have no regret

 It is unclear if these 'proxy' atonements forgive Chillul HaSHem etc

It certainly is not a Kapparah for Bein Adam LeChaveiro


Best,

Meir G. Rabi

0423 207 837
+61 423 207 837
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20250527/3b6f170f/attachment-0001.htm>

The gemara starting in beitza (16b) discusses eruv tavshilin requiring ?kol
shehu? as a czait. Kol shehu is used in many places in the gemara and this
is one of the few examples where it means a measurable amount. Interesting
example of lack of consistent terminology complicating (my) understanding
(or is it a forced interpretation to reconcile conflicting sources?)
bsorot tovot
joel rich
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20250528/c532d34a/attachment-0001.htm>

?This moral framework is also a casuistic (case-specific) judgment-based
moral framework. I mean by this the following: Suppose you have adopted a
specific moral theory and are now trying to apply it to a particular case.
When you apply your theory to the particular case, the different moral
appeals may each, taken alone, support different conclusions. There is no
algorithm to decide which of the appeals has priority in a given case. This
is a matter for judgment, and not for mechanical reasoning. Moreover,
slight differences between the facts in two cases may lead to different
judgments, and that is why such judgments are always case specific. As a
result, even adherents of the same moral theory may be led to different
moral conclusions because they make different judgments about priority.
As a result of these factors, the framework I have developed offers a
straightforward account of why we face so much deep intra-and inter-moral
ambiguity. Some moral ambiguities can be resolved by a closer examination
of the facts and/or by closer attention to the relevant moral appeals.
Others cannot, and these are the deep moral ambiguities. They may be due
either to uncertainties about how to understand the relevant moral appeals
or to uncertainties about what judgment of priority should be made.?
R? A Lichtenstein in The orthodox forum- Toward a renewed ethic of Jewish
philanthropy

I?ve wrestled for a long time with the subjective nature of balancing
competing goods There?s no easy algorithm (e.g lashon hara and tochecha ?
when to hold em and when to fold em)

Any insights appreciated

bsorot tovot

joel rich
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20250528/9b207ae3/attachment-0001.htm>

On Wed, May 28, 2025 at 06:04:09AM +0300, Joel Rich via Avodah wrote:
> I've wrestled for a long time with the subjective nature of balancing
> competing goods There's no easy algorithm (e.g lashon hara and tochecha  -- 
> when to hold em and when to fold em)

I sympathize with your desire to have clarity. It's not going to
happen. It's not supposed to.

The medrash about Emes and Shalom objecting to the creation of humanity and
Hashem throwing Emes down to the ground speaks to one pretty central case.
Truth and Peace, and the need for tact.



In other (and more) words:

RYBS always spoke about human dialectics. The Neo-Kantian dialectic is
never resolves. What gives life meaning, in their opinion, is the discussion
(thus "dialectic"), not the answer. The point is the struggle.

RYBS also emphasized the dialectic nature of halakhah. Or as I would put
it, why we still learn Shas and it didn't get replaced by the Rif. Why
there was opposition to the SA with the Rama until the page standardized
with nosei keilim that makes the text a continuation of the conversation
rather than trying to end it with ultimate answers.

(Insert plug for Arukh haShulchan Yomi over other daily halakhah programs
here.)

Just a couple of hours ago I heard R David Lapin comment on Shavuos 27a
(from today's daf) that this constant conflict of values is why we have
she'eilos to bring to rabbanim and the whole shu"t genre exists, and we
don't just go to books.

(This is in a series I plugged before, "Matmonim",
<https://rabbilapinmatmonim.buzzsprout.com>, and elsewhere. "Matmonim means
'hidden treasures.' In less than 20 minutes each episode highlights,
develops and explains one actionable insight from the Daf Yomi Talmud
study cycle.")



In a third set of words: Life's a Journey. You don't want to reach the
destination yet. Stick with having to make hard decisions. It's what
you're here in this world for.

Chodesh Tov!
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger                 Today is the 45th day, which is
http://www.aishdas.org/asp   6 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer.
Author: Widen Your Tent      Tifferes sheb'Malchus: What is the beauty of
- https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF             unity (on all levels of relationship)?

I think there is a Rivevos Efraim on this. I don't have one at hand.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20250528/43360c39/attachment-0001.htm>

I know that in Y"D 81, both the S"A and B"Y are silent on the concept of
> timtum halev, only the Rama mentions it. Yet I see the yalkut yosef seems
> to bring down the Rama's position  Do you know what the practical Sefardi
> halacha is and why?
> Bsorot tovot
> joel rich
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20250531/f222df0b/attachment-0001.htm>

Two approaches to the above are

Multiple Truths-The Ritva (Eruvin 13b) brought in the name of the French
Sages: HKBH showed Moshe 49 ways to rule pure and 49 ways to rule impure
for each and every matter. When Moshe asked how to know the practical
ruling, the Holy One answered that this is entrusted to the Jewish Sages of
each generation.



*One Truth - Nesivos HaMishpat implies there is only one true opinion.
However, there is nevertheless real value in con*

*sidering ?false opinions? so as to refine/clarify correct opinion*



*Might it be that the question of whether timtum halev is still a concern
even when eating bheter (eg pikuach nefesh) might be part of the same
debate (e.g One truth means it will still harm you)?Bsorot tovot*

*Joel Rich*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20250530/fe1eb2f2/attachment-0001.htm>

If you look at the numbers 12 of the 13 tribes end in 00 and the 13th
Yehuda ends with 50. So the numbers seem to be clearly rounded and so says
the Meshech Chochma. However it is strange that only one tribe is rounded
to 50. If the Torah was rounding to the nearest 50 you would expect a more
even distribution between 50 and 00.
What is more difficult is the end of the parsha where the leviim redeem the
first borns. The Torah gives an exact number of first borns 22273 and
matches it with a rounded number of leviim, 22000. Rashi points out that if
you add up the numbers there were 22300 leviim and therefore quotes Chazal
that 300 were first borns, again a very suspiciously round number. So how
does that work using a rounded number and comparing it to an exact number?
To say that the numbers of leviim was exact both the total number
(22300) and the number of first borns (300) seems to be quite difficult
especially when all the other tribal numbers are rounded.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20250531/1103a000/attachment-0001.htm>

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



_______________________________________________
Avodah mailing list
Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
http://www.aishdas.org/lists/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://www.aishdas.org/lists/avodah/avodahareivim-membership-agreement/


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/lists/avodah/avodah-acronyms
(They are also visible in the web archive copy of each digest.)