Avodah Mailing List

Volume 43: Number 36

Wed, 11 Jun 2025

• 1. bli neder (Jay F. Shachter)
• 2. Re: bli neder (Simon Montagu)
• 3. Amen (Joseph Kaplan)
• 4. Re: nedarim and shevuos (Micha Berger)
• 5. Re: bli neder (Micha Berger)
• 6. Re: bli neder (Simon Montagu)
• 7. Candyman (HT-S Davis jr.) (Joel Rich)
• 8. Daat Torah (Joel Rich)
• 9. Re: bli neder (Micha Berger)
• 10. Re: AI (Micha Berger)
• 11. Re: Eilu Veilu (Micha Berger)

In Vol 43, Issue 35, someone wrote:

> 
> ... if a neder relates to a cheftza, and a shevua applies to an
> action, why do people say "bli neder" so often in the context of
> actions?
> 

You have precisely described my former futile life project, which was
to get people to say "bli shvu`ah" instead of "bli neder", when "bli
shvu`ah" is more appropriate.

(My current futile life project is no longer that, because I have
changed it.  My current futile life project is to get people to say
"sherut l'umit" since "sherut" is feminine.)


               Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter
               6424 North Whipple Street
               Chicago IL  60645-4111
                       +1 773 7613784   landline
                       +1 410 9964737   GoogleVoice
                       j...@m5.chicago.il.us
                       http://m5.chicago.il.us

               When Martin Buber was a schoolboy, it must have been
               no fun at all playing tag with him during recess.

On Mon, Jun 9, 2025 at 11:50?AM Jay F. Shachter via Avodah <
avo...@lists.aishdas.org> wrote:

>
> (My current futile life project is no longer that, because I have
> changed it.  My current futile life project is to get people to say
> "sherut l'umit" since "sherut" is feminine.)
>

Why do you think sherut is feminine? The tav is a root letter, not a
suffix.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20250609/726c3bf8/attachment-0001.htm>

? I put together a shiur on when to answer amen when aveilim are saying
kaddish at different speeds. ... especially when it?s so asynchronous that
it?s not even toch kdei dibbur? If you only answer once, is it the first or
last? What about if toch kdei ? answer the first or the last??

I answer only once and I answer to the last/slowest because I think the
speedsters are simply being rude. It?s really not difficult to modulate
your speed to the slowest reciter ? who often is unable to say it faster ?
so all are saying it  in unison and all who are not saying it can answer
appropriately. It was simply infuriating to me when I was saying Kaddish
when a few would hurry off at their own speed making Kaddish a jumbled mess
rather than a dignified recitation of a meaningful prayer. And it?s still
infuriating to me as a responder now. I?m not talking halacha ? I?m talking
simple derech eretz. Or perhaps I am talking halacha. 

Joseph Kaplan

Sent from my iPhone

On Thu, Jun 05, 2025 at 02:37:27PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote:
> > Or maybe not. Maybe it's *only* the noun "okhel" that has a minimum size.
> > Other cases aren't crossing my mind right now.

> A neder to not get hana'ah from a piece of food?

IF we judge a neder by technical meaning:
If "food" means "a kezayis or more of something edible", then a piece of
food would have to be a piece bigger than a kezayis.

But I think we judge it by colloquial usage. So, "piece of food" would mean
whatever normal English usage is. Even if it's not "okhel".

> Switching to the subject line, this is probably a softball question, but if
> a neder relates to a cheftza, and a shevua applies to an action, why do
> people say "bli neder" so often in the context of actions?

When the pasuq uses the word "yad", does it definitely mean the weaker
hand, or is that only the implication of the word "yed" when "yemin" is
also being used?

I would like to think the former, so that "Poseiach es Yadekha umasbia"
would mean "You open Your 'Hand' of Restraint, so that Your 'Hand' of
Chessed can satisfy..." But that Yeminkha is always there trying to
give. We are talking about a hasaras hamoneia' that would otherwise
prevent the giving.

I ask, because I am tempted to say here that "neder" and "shavua" may
only have specific meanings when they are being used with other such
words so that we know that the general topic is being broken down into
different subcategories.

Like if I said "X is bright and Y is brilliant", you would know that
I definitely mean two different things by "bright" and "brilliant".
But usually, they're pretty much interchangable. (With apologies to R
Jay Schachter.)

> And while I'm at it:  a few days ago, on the daf, the gemara (around
> Shevuos 29?) spoke about Moshe (in Devarim) getting am yisroel to swear
> they will follow the mitzvos.  The discussion revolved around Moshe's
> specific lashon, but I found it curious that I didn't see a mention of the
> issue of "isn't this a shevuas shav" (particularly because we had just
> finished discussing shavuas shav)....

We're talking about the shevatim in Trans-Jordan making a shavu'ah that
they would help fight? Because I cannot get from there to the possibility
of it being "shav". If the tenai is faulty, there is no shavua, and
if it's not, I don't see how it's shav. Please explain further.

Personally, I like the whole idea of logic vs. rhetoric that seems
implied by R Meir's position. Miklal lav implies that there is no middle
ground between lav and hein. And people usually do talk that way. But
in terms of formal logic (using non-Boolean formal logics), "not tall"
includes not only "short" but everyone in the middle of the bell curve
too. (Unless you're closer to my height, where people in the middle of
the bell curve look tall too. <grin>)

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger                 If you can't get beyond your stresses, your
http://www.aishdas.org/asp   problems, and your pain, you can't create
Author: Widen Your Tent      a new future where those things don't exist.
- https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF                - Dr. Joe Dispenza

On Mon, Jun 09, 2025 at 12:38:28PM +0300, Simon Montagu via Avodah wrote:
> Why do you think sherut is feminine? The tav is a root letter, not a
> suffix.

You remind me of the word "tallis", which is indeed feminine. Not because
of the "-is" suffix, but because it is clothing.

Aside from Ashkenazi acharonim who thought in Yiddish, the word in Chazal,
Rishonim, etc... is either "tallisos" or "talliyos". Why the open
question? Because the word is Greek, "stollus". The yud-sav suffix isn't
the Hebrew feminine one. If we act like it is anyway, the word would be
"talliyos", otherwise, "tallisos".

Similarly, "Sheirut" is indeed a feminine noun, even though the vav-tav
is not related to that fact. Probably because service is a "receive
and further develop" type thing. (Blame either the biology of reproduction
or historical gender roles. Just please don't blame me.)

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger                 "I hear, then I forget; I see, then I remember;
http://www.aishdas.org/asp   I do, then I understand." - Confucius
Author: Widen Your Tent      "Hearing doesn't compare to seeing." - Mechilta
- https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF    "We will do and we will listen." - Israelites

On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 11:13?AM Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org> wrote:

> Aside from Ashkenazi acharonim who thought in Yiddish, the word in Chazal,
> Rishonim, etc... is either "tallisos" or "talliyos". Why the open
> question? Because the word is Greek, "stollus". The yud-sav suffix isn't
> the Hebrew feminine one. If we act like it is anyway, the word would be
> "talliyos", otherwise, "tallisos".
>

I don't accept your assertion that the suffix is not the Hebrew feminine
one, and still less your Greek etymology. The word seems like a common
formation from the root t-l-l meaning to cover, the Aramaic cognate of the
Hebrew ts-l-l.


> Similarly, "Sheirut" is indeed a feminine noun, even though the vav-tav
> is not related to that fact. Probably because service is a "receive
> and further develop" type thing. (Blame either the biology of reproduction
> or historical gender roles. Just please don't blame me.)


What is your evidence that Sherut is feminine? Ben Yehuda and Even Shoshan
both say it is masculine, but I only see one quotation in Ben Yehuda which
shows gender:  Yoma 58a "shene khelim besherut ehad"
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20250610/13bf5972/attachment-0001.htm>

From a Times of Israel Blog:
The importance a candyman plays in a shul is a matter of consensus. Making
sure the blessings that come with that role expand to both sides of the
mechitza should also be a matter of consensus.

I?ve always wondered about this role with regards to the age of chinuch and
having those children eating before kiddush. Thoughts?

Bsorot tovot

Joel Rich
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20250611/b54b34d1/attachment-0001.htm>

I've heard some say that in order to be a source of true  daat torah, one
must be detached from the world. If so, does giving practical advice to
real world questions  disqualify one??
Bsorot tovot
joel rich
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20250611/72e9435d/attachment-0001.htm>

On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 09:58:51PM +0300, Simon Montagu via Avodah wrote:
> > question? Because the word is Greek, "stollus". The yud-sav suffix isn't
> > the Hebrew feminine one. If we act like it is anyway, the word would be
> > "talliyos", otherwise, "tallisos".
> 
> I don't accept your assertion that the suffix is not the Hebrew feminine
> one, and still less your Greek etymology. The word seems like a common
> formation from the root t-l-l meaning to cover, the Aramaic cognate of the
> Hebrew ts-l-l.

I wasn't suggesting an etymology for the name a Jewish garment, I was
repeating the idea (which R S Mandel first exposed me to) that the tallis
actually is a Greek stollus, with the sole Jewish element is the addition
of tzitzis.

A stollus, from which we get one of the English words "stole" (as in a
"mink stole"), was a rectangular garment that was one of those in style
during Malkhus Yavan. Even the stripes we still have today (although
Sepharadim have white-on-white ones) were part of the style of that day.

>> Similarly, "Sheirut" is indeed a feminine noun, even though the vav-tav
>> is not related to that fact. Probably because service is a "receive
>> and further develop" type thing. (Blame either the biology of reproduction
>> or historical gender roles. Just please don't blame me.)

> What is your evidence that Sherut is feminine? Ben Yehuda and Even Shoshan
> both say it is masculine, but I only see one quotation in Ben Yehuda which
> shows gender:  Yoma 58a "shene khelim besherut ehad"

Actually, I could cite that very source, since the text actually has
"achas".
https://www.sefaria.org/Yoma.58a.8

But I just wrote that after glancing at an on-line dictionary. I didn't
have a primary source.

(Actually, it's neither in Tanakh nor Mishnah, so we don't have a source
old enough to rule out the likelihood of Aramaic borrowings. I don't
know if Aramaic ever has a different gender for a word than Hebrew did.)

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger                 The day you were born is the day G-d decided
http://www.aishdas.org/asp   that the world could not exist without you.
Author: Widen Your Tent                  - Rav Nachman of Breslov
- https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF

On Wed, May 07, 2025 at 06:17:29AM +0300, Joel Rich via Avodah wrote:
> Rabbi Gil Student (aka The Big Boss Man) introduced an interesting issue in
> his peace on AI and the golem.
> https://www.torahmusings.com/2025/04/ai-golem-and-not-so-silly-questions/

There are two different conversations to be had...

"AI" as it exists today, which is really a Simulated Intelligence that
"only' produces outputs that look like the product of intelligence.

AI as described in Science Fiction, a conscious machine which has a model
of the world, a mental model of itself, first-hand experiences, etc...

RGS appears to be discussing the latter. I don't know if he is aware of
how big the gap is beteen chatGPT and an actual man-made intelligence.

Then there is a third possibility, intelligence without onsciousness.
For exmple, I have argued here and at more length on my blog that the
minds of animals don't contain a model of those minds, the way people
can be aware of our thoughts and think about them. That way lies bechirah
chofshi, since now you can think about your thinking and change what
you think.

To ask about machines or golems that have consciousness pose fundamental
hashkafic issues, as the human soul is a Tzelem Elokim. Can a person
make something like that?

As for Golems, it depends what a Golem is: A Simulated Intelligence?
A way of trapping an angel or demon into a clay body? An animal-level
intelligence, as implied by their inability to speak?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger                 It's nice to be smart,
http://www.aishdas.org/asp   but it's smarter to be nice.
Author: Widen Your Tent                      - R' Lazer Brody
- https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF

On Fri, May 30, 2025 at 03:04:21PM +0300, Joel Rich via Avodah wrote:
> 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.

I argued that the Ran also holds of this. It's hard to tell, because in
Derashah 3 he is definitely using the word "emes" ambiguously to mean
both the "true" in the sense of corresponding to reality and "true" law.

He seems to be saying that Hashem gave multiple paths to Him, and sometimes
the one that captures more metaphysical Truth isn't the best path.

If somoene wants to check my take on it, I am basing myself on what the
Ran writes starting here:
https://www.sefaria.org/Derashot_HaRan.3.23

> One Truth -- Nesivos HaMishpat implies there is only one true opinion.
> However, there is nevertheless real value in considering "false opinions"
> so as to refine/clarify correct opinion

The Maharal writes in Be'eir haGolah 1:6
<https://www.sefaria.org/Be'er_HaGolah%2C_Well_1.6>,
that Eilu vaEilu is literal, because Hashem's Emes cannot fit in this
world, and therefore Beis Shammai and Beis Hillel each capture aspects
of a larger Truth that is beyond us.

In the past, I used the mashal of 2 dimansional beings trying to understand
a cube. One person sees it face on, and sees a square. Another, facing
a corner, sees a hexagon. Since more people identify with the perspective
that yeilds a square, we act as though it's a square. Even though that
only captures one face of the Truth, whereas the hexagon includes 3!

(And certianly one cannot pick elements of one or the other, and follow
a practice that doesn't fit either silluette. There'd be no correlation
to the original cube anymore!)

> 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

Could be... Also related is whether the food through metaphysical
causality is metameim es haleiv, or the act of sinning through food
which does so. Qabbalah vs. "Rationalism".

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger                 We are great, and our foibles are great,
http://www.aishdas.org/asp   and therefore our troubles are great --
Author: Widen Your Tent      but our consolations will also be great.
- https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF                      - Rabbi AY Kook


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



_______________________________________________
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.)