Avodah Mailing List

Volume 03 : Number 057

Tuesday, May 18 1999

< Previous Next >
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 08:47:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: Moshe Feldman <moshe_feldman@yahoo.com>
Re: Daviry on Shevuos

--- richard_wolpoe@ibi.com wrote:
> KSA 103:7 mentions a remez for eating dairy on Shevuos
> Mincho CHadosho Lashem Beshovuoseichem
> Rosehei Teivos mecholov.
> Questions:
> What are the earliest sources for this minhog?
> KSA says meat is required even on Sh'vuos. Are there any poskim
> that argue and 
> say that dairy is sufficient?

I seem to recall that the Ramo says that we eat TWO meals on Shavuot
night--one dairy and one meat--as a zecher to the Sh'tai HaLechem
(since presumably one is using a different loaf of bread for meat
than for dairy).

Kol tuv,
Do You Yahoo!?
Free instant messaging and more at http://messenger.yahoo.com

Go to top.

Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 11:47:54 EDT
From: TROMBAEDU@aol.com
Re: Avodah vs. Milachah

In a message dated 5/18/99 10:31:08 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
micha@aishdas.org writes:

<< All this got me wondering, though, why avodas Hashem is called "avodah", 
 not "melachah". Any ideas?
 -mi >>

Doesn't A' V' D' imply a subordinate relationship. Thus, serving God is an 
indication of our  subservience to Him. 


Go to top.

Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 11:09:53 -0500
From: Steve Katz <katzco@sprintmail.com>

The apportionment of Knesset seats to the various parties will 
apparently be as follows: 
                     One Israel (Labor)                 27
                     Likud                              19
                     Shas                               17
                     Meretz                              9
                     Yisrael B'Aliyah(Sharansky)         7
                     Centrist                            6
                     Shinui (Tommy Lapid)                6
                     United Torah Judaism                5
                     National Religious Party            5
                     Arab Democratic Party               5
	             National Union                      3
                     Yisrael Beiteinu                    4
                     Hadash                              3
                     Am Echad (Amir Peretz)              2
                     National Democratic Alliance - Arab 2

Go to top.

Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 09:36:16 -0700 (PDT)
From: Moshe Feldman <moshe_feldman@yahoo.com>
Re: Election

Please post the time and source of your information (especially as it
differs with the prior information

--- Steve Katz  wrote:
> The apportionment of Knesset seats to the various parties will 
> apparently be as follows: 
>                      One Israel (Labor)                 27
>                      Likud                              19
>                      Shas                               17
>                      Meretz                              9
>                      Yisrael B'Aliyah(Sharansky)         7
>                      Centrist                            6
>                      Shinui (Tommy Lapid)                6
>                      United Torah Judaism                5
>                      National Religious Party            5
>                      Arab Democratic Party               5
> 	             National Union                      3
>                      Yisrael Beiteinu                    4
>                      Hadash                              3
>                      Am Echad (Amir Peretz)              2
>                      National Democratic Alliance - Arab 2

Do You Yahoo!?
Free instant messaging and more at http://messenger.yahoo.com

Go to top.

Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 12:28:39 -0400
From: "Allen Baruch" <Abaruch@SINAI-BALT.COM>
RE: The Charedi Loss in the Israeli Elections (Avodah V3 #55)

Harry Maryles <C-Maryles@neiu.edu> wrote (and I apologize for "snipping" out of order)
'I haven't even scratched the surface of my depression over the events 
taking place in Israel.  Perhaps I am over-reacting and things won't get 
as bad for the Charedim as I feel they will... I just don't know. ... 
"It was an "IN YOU FACE" attitude towards chiloni society 
that created this reactionary stance on the part of the electorate."

I too am depressed by the situation there (reading the "major" American coverage with it's very obvious anti-religious bias did not help much), and  while there may be an "in your face mentality" on the part of the Charedim, it definitely goes the other way as well. In fact, the "big" news items (ie, the draft, pork) were brought to the forefront by an activist (run amok?) anti religious Court. Not only that, but the major media is almost exclusively anti-chareidi and they have chosen to exacerbate any and all ill feelings.

Sender Baruch

Go to top.

Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 11:41:33 -0500
From: Avram Sacks <Avram_Sacks@cch.com>
Re: Election

	The latest information at the Virtual Jerusalem website has the
following, which matches what Steve Katz posted. :

	Israel TV - Channel One Exit Polls:
	Prime Ministerial Race (as of 07:30 IST/ 00:30 EST):

	Barak: 56%
	Netanyahu: 43.9%

	(97.5% of the vote counted)

	Elections for the 15th Knesset (Source: Reuters, based on unofficial
returns from 99.9 percent of polling stations):

	One Israel 27 mandates
	Likud 19
	Shas 17
	Meretz 9
	United Torah Judaism 5
	Shinui 6
	Yisrael B'Aliyah 7
	Center 6
	National Religious (NRP) 5
	National Union 3
	National Democratic Alliance (Balad) 2
	Arab Democratic Party 5
	Yisrael Beteinu 4
	One Nation 2
	Hadash 3

	Avram Sacks
	Chicago, IL

	From:	Moshe Feldman <moshe_feldman@yahoo.com> on 05/18/99 11:36 AM
	To:	avodah@aishdas.org@SMTP@cchntmsd,

	Subject:	Re: Election

	Please post the time and source of your information (especially as
	differs with the prior information

	--- Steve Katz  wrote:
	> The apportionment of Knesset seats to the various parties will 
	> apparently be as follows: 
	>                      One Israel (Labor)                 27
	>                      Likud                              19
	>                      Shas                               17
	>                      Meretz                              9
	>                      Yisrael B'Aliyah(Sharansky)         7
	>                      Centrist                            6
	>                      Shinui (Tommy Lapid)                6
	>                      United Torah Judaism                5
	>                      National Religious Party            5
	>                      Arab Democratic Party               5
	> 	             National Union                      3
	>                      Yisrael Beiteinu                    4
	>                      Hadash                              3
	>                      Am Echad (Amir Peretz)              2
	>                      National Democratic Alliance - Arab 2

	Do You Yahoo!?
	Free instant messaging and more at http://messenger.yahoo.com

Go to top.

Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 12:50:49 EDT
From: Yzkd@aol.com
Re: Waiting for Mashi'ah

47 to the Omer

In a message dated 5/18/99 9:41:53 AM EST, REC writes:

> I am grateful for this source.  It is one with which I am not familiar.
>  Could I trouble you to tell us a little bit about the sefer you are
>  quoting?

The Sefer Beis E-lokim was written by HG"M Moshe B"M Yosef Troni, he was a 
contemporary of the RaDBaZ, Alshich, and many more, the details can be found 
in the Seder Hadoros years 5281 and 5300, it is on Hashkafa with 3 Sh'orim 
Tfilah Tshuva and Ikrim, also includes a Pirush to Perek Shira. 
>  As a side point, the translation I quoted is from the Arabic original,
>  and I am in no position to judge its accuracy.  But the passage you have
>  quoted seems to be more of a perush, so I do not really understand why
>  this perush is evidence of an erroneous translation.
Let me clarify, in translating from one language to another there are always 
problems, as a statement in one language when translated literally into 
another can mean something other then was intended, in our case some 
understood that translation that the Rambam said that Moshiach will be long 
(G-d forbid), rather then that thought is negated by the Possuk "Im 
Yismameiah Chakei Loi"

Kol Tuv

Yitzchok Zirkind

Go to top.

Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 11:57:13 -0500
From: Avram Sacks <Avram_Sacks@cch.com>
Israeli election results

Here is a comparison of the pre and post election Knessets, courtesy of
Israel Wire and... you guessed it, Virtual Jerusalem:

The Winners and Losers
(IsraelWire-5/18) The following is a comparison of the 14th and the 15th

One Israel
14th Knesset - Labor Party- 34
15th Knesset - (Labor/Gesher/Meimad) - 27

14th Knesset - 32
15th Knesset - 19

14th Knesset - 10
15th Knesset - 17

National Religious Party 
14th Knesset - 9
15th Knesset - 5

Yisrael B'Aliyah
14th Knesset - 7
15th Knesset - 7

United Torah Judaism (Agudat Yisrael/Degel HaTorah)
14th Knesset - 4
15th Knesset - 5

14th Knesset - 5
15th Knesset - 3

14th Knesset - (Citizens Rights/Shinui/Mapam) - 9
15th Knesset - 9


Go to top.

Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 12:58:14 -0400
From: "Rayman, Mark" <mrayman@lehman.com>
13 ikkarim

Thank you Jordan for getting me involved in this.

The Rambam is perek 3 of hilkhos teshuva (halakha 14) 
(working off Rosh Hashana 17) enumerates those who loose their chelek in
olam haba.  He has 5 categories:

kofrim batora
kofrim betechiyas hameisim (THM)
kofrim bevias goel

(the others mentioned there, even meshumadim are all "action oriented",
these 5 seem to be "belief oriented")

He then enumerates (the numbers are explicit!) 5 minim, 3 apikursim, 3
kofrim batora, that makes 11, and when we add THM and moshiach we get ...

This seems to be another formulation of the 13 ikkarim.

The following are some discrepancies between this list (MT) and the standard
one from the peirush hamishnayos to perek cheilek (PHM):

MT does not list sechar va-onesh
MT counts belief in written and oral Torah as two things

PHM has sechar va-onesh
PHM list belief in written and oral as one ikkar

MT: The rambam uses the formulation "ha-omer she-ein ...".  This sounds like
the person must categorically reject these things to loose his/her olam

PHM:  The rambam (according to Kappach trans) says "hamefakpek", which seems
to imply even if you just doubt any of these things, one looses her/his
share in the world to come.

Just a few more observations:

Since both lists come out to 13, albeit a different 13, it seems that 13 is
some sort of magic (predetermined) number.  See the Chasam Sofer mentioned
by Moshe Feldman (the last teshuva in YD) who also believes this.

From MT it seems that the 13 ikkarim are really 5 then subdivided into 13,
which may imply that some ikkarim are "sub" ikkarim of others.

All of the 5 "super" ikkarim are mentioned in RH 17, except moshiach.  What
is the source then for the rambam, that one who does not believe in moshiach
has no cheilek in OHB???


Jordan Hirsch said:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TROMBAEDU@aol.com
> Subject: Re: Rambam's ikarim
> First of all, thank you for addressing my question. Second, I can't
> remember 
> offhand the exact Perek, but the Rambam also discusses the 13 Ikkarim in 
> terms of how they relate to various forms of heresy in Hilchos Tshuvah. 
> (Incidentally, I had the pleasure of hearing list member Moshe Rayman give
> a 
> shiur on this topic recently at Cong. Rinat Yisrael in Teaneck). He 
> formulates them there in categories relating to the various ways one can
> be a 
> Heretic.
> Jordan

Go to top.

Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 13:58:04 -0400
From: richard_wolpoe@ibi.com
Rambam's ikkarim

Sholem Berger asks:

>>When did the thirteen ikarim become accepted as the litmus test for 
theological orthodoxy?  <<

REC: << The question is an excellent one.  The historical answer to your 
question is the nineteenth century, with the rise of heterodox 

Dr. Hyman Grinstein outlined several sub-groupings within American Orthodoxy 
(i.e. 19th & 20h Centuries).  The "left-most" of them were defined as adhering 
to the doctrine of the 13 Ikkarim w/o being stricly Shomer Mitzvos.  These were 
"non-practicing" Orthodox, or Ortho by affiliation, not by observance...
Lich'orah, this group has its origins in the early 19th century, co-inciding 
with REC's comments above.

It is unclear when the Rambam's ikkarim became THE normative set of ikkarim, in 
contradistinction to the competing lists of Saadya, Albo, etc.  

Rich wolpoe

Go to top.

Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 12:56:42 -0400
From: Sholem Berger <bergez01@med.nyu.edu>
Rambam's ikarim and batei dinim

From: micha@aishdas.org (Micha Berger)
Subject: Re: Rambam's ikarim

>I'm pretty sure the overwhelming majority of batei din ligeirus require belief
>in the 13 ikkarim before they'd consider a candidate.

Why is this the case?  Especially given the explanation of the ikkarim which you bring below: 

> The Rambam lists 13 things that distinguish Yahadus from other
>faiths. For example seperating non-corporeality from unity was philosophically
>unecessary. A body is composed of parts. Therefore an Absolute Unity could
>not have a body. The ikkar about non-corporeality was probably written to be
>anti-Christian. Similarly, the fact that HKBH doesn't change His "Mind" is
>implied in the fact that He's "above" time. However, that ikkar is required
>as a response to the Christian Bible and the Koran (as well as other texts
>written since the Rambam's day).

I'm not sure how these distinguish Judaism from other faiths: many Christians and Muslims profess a belief in incorporeality, and they would also say that God hasn't changed his mind -- they'd just differ on the conclusions.  

Given this, and what was said by someone else (I forget who, sorry) about the 13 ikkarim being "accepted" by the observant community only in Yigdal form, why do the overwhelming majority of batei din legeyrus make this a condition?  If the ger were to come in with a different, alternative theology to the Rambam's, would that be acceptable?  

Sholem Berger

Go to top.

Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 12:12:25 -0500 (EST)
From: David Roth <droth@pobox.com>
Election Results / Knesset Comparison

Moshe Feldman had asked:
> Where can I find a comparison of these results with the composition
> of the outgoing Knesset?

Take a look at http://www.israelwire.com/Ele/990518/99051829.html

I reached this link from http://www.vjnews.com/elections99/, which
another poster helpfully supplied.

Kol tuv,

Go to top.

Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 13:37:00 -0400
From: "Clark, Eli" <clarke@HUGHESHUBBARD.COM>
Israeli Elections, Public Policy and Halakhah

In hope of using current events as a springboard to a Torah discussion:

How does (or should) Halakhah relate to voting decisions?  As is
well-known, with the exception of Meimad, all of the religious parties
aligned themselves with Netanyahu.  Indeed, R. Mordekhai Eliyahu went so
far as to issue a halakhic "pesak" requiring one to vote for Netanyahu.

Why?  We start from the premise that none of the prime ministerial
candidates embodies the ideal halakhic candidate.  (At least two,
Yitzhak Mordekhai and Netanyahu are respectful of tradition, but neither
is observant.)  What, then, are the relevant criteria?  For the haredi
community, I would assume, Barak's threats to cut off money to yeshivot
and to draft haredi men made Netanyahu preferable.  Hence, the decision
was rooted in concern for talmud Torah and avoidance of possible issurim
related to army service.  For R. Eliyahu and other religious
nationalists, I assume, the primary issue was transferring territory
into non-Jewish hands.  For a number of Zionist rabbanim, following
Ramban, this violates an issur de-Oraita.  Note too that Netanyahu has
already committed this "issur" and would probably do so again, though,
it is generally assumed, to a lesser degree than his opponent.

This raises a number of questions.  In both cases, the rationale seems
to be minimizing issurim.  Neither candidate embraced a platform that
explicitly supported the expansion of Torah or mitzvot.  Moreover, the
choices are all based on presumptions and expectations.  There was no
guarantee that the religious parties' favored candidate would not (a)
endorse a bill to draft haredim or (b) give Jewish territory to
non-Jews.  If we really want to avoid issurim altogether, go le-humra,
so to speak, shouldn't one simply abstain from voting for prime

A related question is how does the action of voting relate halakhically
to the policies of the candidate?  Is someone required to view a
candidate's policies (which generally are nothing more than campaign
promises) as direct consequences of one's vote?  I assume not.  Does
voting then require a person to familiarize himself or herself with the
overall political scene in order to make an educated guess as to which
policies are likely to be implemented and which not?

Another question: How does one determine which issue is decisive?  For
example, one Israeli politician is strongly opposed to territorial
transfer but supports drafting haredim into the army.  Or, in the case
of a candidate in the USA, what matters most: the politician's view on
abortions, capital punishment or private school vouchers?

 Given that representative democracy is fairly recent development, and
that Jews have only recently become eligible to vote, there is a dearth
of halakhic sources on the issue.  Moreover, in Eretz Yisrael the issue
is complicated by existential and cultural issues.

I would think that meta-halakhic principles must come into play here,
especially issues of kiddush Hashem.  On that analysis, the overall
impression given by Torah Jews and their elected representatives might
be paramount, superseding even specific policy issues relating to talmud
Torah or the issurim mentioned above.  However, this analysis is clearly
contradicted le-ma'aseh by the religious parties in Israel.  (All of
them, though to varying degrees.)  So, someone must have a different
sevara.  Any ideas?

Kol tuv,

Eli Clark

Go to top.

Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 12:51:30 -0500
From: Steve Katz <katzco@sprintmail.com>

Moshe Feldman <moshe_feldman@yahoo.com>
       avodah@aishdas.org, katzco@sprintmail.com

Please post the time and source of your information (especially as it
differs with the prior information

arutz sheva

Go to top.

Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 14:14:00 -0400
From: "Clark, Eli" <clarke@HUGHESHUBBARD.COM>
Brisker Torah

RYZ writes:

>However the Yesod for this approach is Bpashtus the Chazal that the Torah is
>the blueprints for the world hence everything is first found in Torah and
>that is the source for it later being visible to our eyes, (even though that
>OTOH we have the Kllal "Lomoh Le Krah Sevoroh He").

I would quibble with that.  Hazal say "Istakal be-Oraita, bara alma."
This does not necessarily imply that a pasuk is a superior re'ayah to
physical reality.  Hashem created both and made the world reflect Torah.
 Therefore, at a minimum, they should be equal in value.  To say
otherwise would imply something deficient in the beri'ah as a reflection
of Torah.  Moreover, the physical reality may be, for us, a better
re'ayah.  After all, a pasuk can be understood in more than one way.
Physical reality is usually less open to interpretation (I am not making
an epistemological statement here; I am thinking in terms of the issues
discussed in the relevant Gemaras.)

>>I find the chiddush
>>  remarkable  - see Niddah 30b where the chachamim counter R' Yishmael's
>> proofs
>>  from pesukim that a nekeivah is formed after 80 days with proof from
>>  autopsies.

>IMHO Adraboh there the Chachomim disagreed with his Limud, IOW had they
>accepted his Limud then they would accept his answers, (Bdugmas Taanis 5b
>"Mikroh Ani Doreish" it makes no difference what the external world seems to

I agree, but I still think the Gemara supports R. Chaim.  First, the
Hakhamim reject R. Yishma'el's limmud of yetzirah from tum'ah.  Then
they go on to bring a re'ayah from ma'aseh Cleopatra.  But why do they
need to do so if they have already rejected the limmud?  Indeed, the
Gemara itself goes on to show that the original limmud was not a re'ayah
from the Torah; R. Yishma'el needs the pasuk of "teled."  Then, R.
Yishma'el -- who has brought a re'ayah from "teled" -- finds it
necessary to refute the re'ayah from ma'aseh Cleopatra.  Meanwhile, the
Hakhamim never go back to refute his derashah of "teled."  Also the
Gemara then quotes a Tosefta where R. Yishma'el brings a re'ayah from a
(different) ma'aseh Cleopatra.  Why would he do so if he already has his
limmud from "teled"?  (An ahistorical argument, I know.)

Hence, like RCB, I think this sugya represents a  kashya on the hiddush
of the Brisker Rav.

Kol tuv,

Eli Clark

Go to top.

Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 21:21:47 +0300
From: Hershel Ginsburg <ginzy@netvision.net.il>
Re: Israelli Election - Prior Posted Results are Tentative

>Could one of our number please post the breakdown of seats in the new
>Knesset? Please feel free to add your own analysis of coalition
>possibilites. While Avodah is not normally the case for political
>discussions, I think we can agree to a temporary dispensation!

The final vote counts are not in, as the soldiers' votes as well as the
votes from Israel's diplomatic missions are to be counted tomorrow, with
results expected by tomorrow evening Israel Time.  All told there are about
150,000 votes to be counted.  Although these won't make much of a
difference in the Prime Minister's race, it probably will have an impact on
the distribution of the Kenneset seats, particularly vis a vis some of the
smaller parties and those that just missed the minimum percentage for entry
into the Kennesset.

B'lie Neder, when the final counts are announced I will post them.

More important than analyzing coalition possibilities, I think it might be
more important to discuss the religious/sociological implications of the
elections which are very significant and to my mind, deman a very serious
cheshbon hanefesh.

For those interested in following updated election results, I suggest
checking the Jerusalem Post's special election web site at:


Also consider checking Ha'aretz's web site at http://www.haaretz.com . From
there you can link to the English version of Ha'aretz.


  Hershel & Susan Ginsburg               Internet: ginzy@netvision.net.il
  P.O. Box 1058 / Rimon St. 27           Phone: 972-2-993-8134
  Efrat,  90435                          FAX:  972-2-993-8122


Go to top.

Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 14:23:51 -0400 (EDT)
From: Zvi Weiss <weissz@idt.net>
Re: Avodah V3 #56

Comments about the Kenesset.
1. I think that if you check the Arutz-7 web-site, they will include both
the current and previous seat counts.  I recall seeing it in the e-mail
that I get from them and I am pretty sure but not positive that anyone can
find the same material currently on the web site, as well.

2. Fears:
Outside of the issue that I have that Labor/Peres/Barak do not appear to
hold the PA to any sort of compliance, there are the following concerns:
1. During the campaign as best as I could follow from here, Barak NEVER
formulated any sort of "red lines" that I could see.  This implies a
position of being willing to give into anything.
2. Barak and his list did not appear to adequately address themselves to
the vitrioloc stuff that came out of Shinui -- The hanging of a banner
across a highway (as reported on Arutz-7) with the phrase "Dosim
L'Misrafos" shoudl have been condemned AT LEAST as strongly as people are
condemning Deri (whose case is a bit convoluted [to say the least] and who
appears to have been selectively targeted since OTHER Members of Kenesset
who have committed alleged wrong-doing are simply not preosecuted).  This
is the same fellow who had a campaign where by he tried to claim that the
reason that University Students (and others) are "deprived" is because
"the Chareidim" get money (as if certain segments of the population are
not supposed to be funded because they are religious).. 
3. The current breakdown apparently will allow the Coalition to be set up
without ANY need for religious participation.  When Peres was in power and
the MEretz people were in charge -- they not only looted the budget for
"their" pet items (remember the comment above about selective
prosecution?), they were "so bad" in the schools that CHILONI parents were
starting to send their kids to Mamlachti Dati (which -- by law -- are
shielded from the secular Education Ministry)...  This does not sound like
a great situation for Frum people these days...

BTW, I am pretty sure that Arutz-7 can provide background info 
 on a lot of this stuff here.


Go to top.

Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 21:29:23 +0300
From: Moshe & Channah Koppel <koppel@netvision.net.il>
election results

For those interested here are the final election results (not counting
soldiers and diplomats - some results might change slightly).
(The labels are very crude and several parties could have been labelled
Likud 19
Yisrael Beteinu 4
Ichud Leumi 3

Shas 17
United Torah Judaism 5
National Religious (NRP) 5

Yisrael B'Aliyah 7
Center 6

One Israel 27 mandates
One Nation 2

Meretz 9
Shinui 6

National Democratic Alliance (Balad) 2
Hadash 3
Islamic Party 5

The results are not all that different than last time. The main differences
are the shift from Likud to Shas and to Yisrael Beiteinu and from both
sides to Center and Shinui. The coalition will surely include the parties I
labelled CENTER and LABOR. In addition Meretz and Likud are likely to be in
and either Shas or Shinui (but not both).


Go to top.


[ Distributed to the Avodah mailing list, digested version.                   ]
[ To post: mail to avodah@aishdas.org                                         ]
[ For back issues: mail "get avodah-digest vXX.nYYY" to majordomo@aishdas.org ]
[ or, the archive can be found at http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/              ]
[ For general requests: mail the word "help" to majordomo@aishdas.org         ]

< Previous Next >