Avodah Mailing List
Volume 03 : Number 017
Monday, April 12 1999
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999 00:32:47 EDT
Subject: Re: Avodah V3 #16;Yiddish
Rabbi Soloveitchek z'l articulated his view of Yiddish in an article
originally written for the Tag, later translated in "Jewish Life,and later
reprinted in Never Say Die,edited by Joshua Fisman.He wrote that while
Yiddish doesn't have kedusha,it served as the language in which divrei Torah
were given over for geneations,and therefore, like a Torah mantle,has the
status of tashmishei kedusha, and is therefore worthy of preservation. In
addition,Rav Shachter in Nefesh hoRav writes that the Rav had trouble,when he
first switched from English toYiddish, in correctly wording the precise
definitions of halahic categories he used in his shiurim,and that it was an
'avodah kashe bemikdash.'
Go to top.
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999 10:09:49 +0300
From: "Prof. Aryeh A. Frimer" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Divrei Torah
As all are acutely aware, "Sheimos" has turned into a major problem.
This is particularly true in Israel in which we are literally innundated
every erev Shabbat with Torah containing newspapers and Torah pamphlets
of all kinds from a variety of sources. I am in search of marei
makom/Teshuvot regarding the disposal of the following which contain
(1) Newspapers (mostly news and articles; some Torah columns and
(2) Tapes, diskettes and CD's.
Go to top.
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999 13:49 +0200
Subject: re: Jews of Albania
Unfortunately, we're *not* dealing with PIDYON SHVUYIM: saving the *Jews*
of Albania. We're dealing with gentiles and as I pointed out in
soc.culture.jewish many of these Muslim Albanians volunteered in the
SS Skanderbeg Division.
The halachic question deals with LO TECHANEM. The Rambam (Hilchot Avodat
Kochaim 10:2) rules that MISHUM EIVA one is allowed to treat gentile patients
for payment. Although the Ramban (as quoted in the Bet Yosef TUR YD 158) says
that one is allowed to treat them even for free, the GRA (s"k 4) rules like
the Rambam. So, if Jews were living in Albania (and they're not), MISHUM EIVA
they could take care of their gentile neighbors. Likewise, the gemara in
Gittin 61a indicates "Mefarnasim aniyai akum im aniyai yisrael .. mipnei
darchei shalom". But again, there *aren't* any Jews living there !
Not only is Israel spending millions of dollars in aid relief in Albania,
it will also bring 100 of these Muslims to Israel. I suggest that someone
look in the TUR YD 151 (ein mochrim lahem b'eretz yisrael kol davar
ha'mechubar ..). These people will be settling in Israel, buying homes, etc.
And to top off the chutzpa: the Jewish Agency, instead of spending money on
Jewish education in the Diaspora, sends in 8 planes with aid and will be the
ones who bring back the 100 gentile Albanian Muslims on Tuesday, YOM HASHOAH.
Go to top.
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999 12:49:01 -0700
From: Ezriel Krumbein <email@example.com>
Subject: Yom Tov Day Kiddush aka Kidusha Rabba
Over Yom Tov I noticed that in the Siddur Tifilas Yosef with the Pesakim
of the Mishna Berura authored by Y. Beker. Tha in Yom Tov Day Kiddush
aka Kidusha Rabba the pasuk of "Eleh Moadei..." is left out and only the
Pasuk of "VaYedaber..." is there. Does anyone know of a reason why.
Go to top.
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999 14:37:28 -0400 (EDT)
From: Zvi Weiss <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: Avodah V3 #11
> Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 11:06:12 -0500 (EST)
> From: Sammy Ominsky <email@example.com>
> Subject: Re: Shoftim and Melachim
> Micha says:
> > 1- The need to have shoftim (legislative judges);
> > 2- The role those shoftim repeatedly played before we had a king.
> > #2 was certainly NOT the ideal. Both in Shoftim and in Rus, those times were
> > described as "ein melech biyisra'el, ish hayashar bei'nav ya'aseh". So, some
> > charismatic shoftim were able to step up occasionally to fill that vacuum.
> > Notice this only happened in time of need -- after k'lal yisrael went off
> > the derech, and onesh was immanent.
> Why would that not be the ideal? I've frequently considered that pasuk to
> adequately express my own political philosophy. Consider, if we live in a
> society comprised entirely of yirei shomaim, what need have we of
> governance? Only when something goes terribly wrong (your "time of need")
> is it necessary for a charismatic shofet to step forward to do what must
> be done. Otherwise, to turn your phrase, there is no need.
===> I can think of a few reasons:
1. Because even Yir'ei Shomayim can err and require "correction".
2. There are matters that can only be handled by a body that represents
the community. The Sanhedrin does not appear to have the same
administrative capability that a Melech has (consider that a Melech can
short-circuit certain legal preocedures that a Sanhedrin will have greater
"difficulty" dealing with.
3. It is not clear that people (even in Y.mos Hamashiach) will reach the
level of perfection noted above.
4. I do not think that a Melech is simply a "charismatic shofet". If you
look at the pesukim that describe G-d's promises to Dovid (try yesterday's
haftara for starters), it appears that a Melech is a major aid in the
maintenance of a "G-dly Kingdom". I would add that it would be
interesting to look at Yechezkiel where he talks about the [hereditary]
"Nasi" -- who seems to correspond to Melech.
> - ---sam
Go to top.
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999 15:51:59 -0400 (EDT)
From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Micha Berger)
Subject: Orthodox Priorities
I think there's a range of reasons our community has the priorities it
Some of it is, as others have pointed out, reactionary. Not necessary a
lihachis thing, there's also a strong need to shore up those values
that aren't being stressed in the general society.
For example, while the typical American parent is concerned about the
amount of violence his child is exposed to, the frum parent is concerned
about the pornographic content. Even to the point of overshadowing the
Second, keeping our own community afloat is taking much of our resources.
After tuition, kashrus, yomim tovim, our own poor, the bikur cholim, the
g'mach, the chevrah, shul fees, the mikvah building fund, never mind supporting
kiruv, special ed, etc... how much money or time is left for anything else?
Now, if we neglect supporting conservation efforts, even those in Israel,
there's a real chance someone else will pick up the slack. You can't, however,
expect much chiloni money going to support our internal causes.
Third, we try to minimize assimilation (both out of the Jewish community and
out of frumkeit in particular). This can lead to defining ourselves at least in
part by what we aren't. So, attention ends up being paid to those things
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287 MMG"H for 11-Apr-99: Cohen, Sazria-Metzora
email@example.com A"H O"Ch 310:12-311:2
http://www.aishdas.org Eruvin 63b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light. Shmuel-II 19
Go to top.
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 09:11:32 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Turkel <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: unknown rishonim
In my post on halacha ke-batroi I mentioned that one of the pushers for
this was the Maharik. He adds the following qualification - we pasken
like the later authority only if he was aware of the earlier work.
Otherwise, we assume that had he known the earlier work he might have
changed his opinion.
In seems to me that this is exactly the opposite of the attitude of
Chazon Ish that unknown manuscripts of rishonim don't count for very
As a specific example there now exist versions of the Ri Migash on various
mesechtot. The Ri Migash was recognized as a major rishon and so there is
no controversy about his personal status.
My impression is that Chazon ish would state that because these perushim
have not been analyzed by generations of scholars they don't carry much
weight. Maharik would claim exactly the opposite. Precisely because it
was unknown it carries more weight. If acharonim disagree with, say, Ramban
that is because they saw his opinion and discarded it for some reason.
However, if they disagree with this Ri Migash it is only because they were
not aware of the perush and had they been aware they would have changed
I strongly feel that some acharonim carry this principle of the Maharik
too far. I have seen several teshuvot that quote Rav Moshe and then show
that some lesser known acharon from earlier generations disagreed.
They then conclude that had R. Moshe seen the earlier teshuva he would have
changed his mind. Given my knowledge of Rav Moshe's psaks I highly doubt
such an approach. Rav Moshe was an independent thinker who took into
account certain major acharonim poskim and not everyone who wrote a sefer.
Go to top.
[ Distributed to the Avodah mailing list, digested version. ]
[ To post: mail to email@example.com ]
[ For back issues: mail "get avodah-digest vXX.nYYY" to firstname.lastname@example.org ]
[ or, the archive can be found at http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/ ]
[ For general requests: mail the word "help" to email@example.com ]