Avodah Mailing List

Volume 05 : Number 109

Monday, August 28 2000

< Previous Next >
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 23:20:17 -0400
From: perzvi@juno.com
Re: Avodah V5 #108

On Wed, 23 Aug 2000, Alan Davidson wrote:
>> Almost every Ruv I know will argue that if you know that house A. or room
>> B. has a light sensor it is assur to walk on the sidewalk if you know you
>> will be tripping it up....

From: "Shoshanah M. & Yosef G. Bechhofer" <sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>
> But why?

Because you know davka that by stepping in front of a particular house shabbos
night you are turning on a sensor -- walking in front of that house is no
different than you walking through your front door if you forgot to disable
your sensor before shabbos.

Go to top.

Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 02:32:39 +1000
From: SBA <sba@blaze.net.au>
Tefillos for non Cholim, (was Areivim: surgery update)

From: Micha Berger
> Doesn't "refa'einu" mean "all of us", both healthy and sick? I know that I
> say the "-nu" suffix, meaning anachnu, even when I myself am healthy.

Refoenu means "heal us". When one is well, why would he ask to be healed?

(Al tiftach peh l'soton...)

>: V'efsher (?) Lomer: that the first Chaim Sheyesh BOHEM YS is indeed a Tefilla
>: for our children - and that is why we say "BOHEM" - referring "them" - our
>: children.

> I'm not so sure, as there is nothing to indicate that this is the noun. OTOH,
> there already is a noun bilashon rabbim in the phrase "chayim".

To be honest, I am also not too sure of my little pshetl.
But when it comes to drush - most are not too makpid on dikduk etc.

> In the first bakashah, where we are asking for YS directly, we can only ask
> for the latter. There is no direct hishtadlus for YS -- hakol biydei Shamayim
> chutz miYS.

I hope to write something about this (and RGD's post) later.

>: V'al pi zeh - all the above 3 questions are resolved...

> Why? How does inclusion in birchas hachodesh explain ommission from Shemoneh
> Esrei?

The 3 questions were about theYehi Rotzon Tefillah (not the SE)

>> In the Yehi Rotzon that (most of us) say before Birchas Hachodesh -
>>    3 questions:

>>   1) Why does Yiras Shomayim get 2 mentions: (Chaim sheyesh bohem *Yiras
>>       Shomayim* & Chaim shet'hei Bonu Ahavas Torah *V'yiras Shomayim*),
>>   2) Why the change in style - Sheyesh BOHEM/Sh't'hei BONU?
>>   3) Why no request for our children to be Yerei Shomayim?

and LAD - they get resolved.

> ...the first Chaim Sheyesh BOHEM YS is indeed a Tefilla  for our
>   children - and that is why we say "BOHEM" - referring to "them" - our
>   children.  Whilst the second - Sh't'hei "BONU" - refers to OUR own YS.


Go to top.

Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:06:04 -0500
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
Re: Boneh/Boney Yerushalaim

Gil.Student@citicorp.com wrote to Avodah:
> Rabbi Mordechai Cohen, professor of Bible at YU, told me that there is no
> present tense in biblical Hebrew.  It is due to the influence of modern
> hebrew that consider adjectives to be present tense verbs.  

This is a stronger form than my original claim. My point was that the
Author of Lashon haKodesh clearly wanted to blur the distinction between
a relationship and an act. The same word is used for the one who does
an action and the lashon hoveh, so that po'el means both "one who does"
and "doing".

On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 08:30:36PM -0400, Yzkd@aol.com replied:
: A few of the questions that come to mind:
: Breishis 13:5 "HaHoleich"
: Breishis 23:10 Rashi D"H Vefron Yoshav

Both make sense as adjectives. Instead of Rashi discussing Lot's zechus
for walking with Avraham, or a p'gam in Efron's yeshivah, he could equally
well be understood at talking about Lot's zechus in being a holeich and
that Efron was only an imperfect yosheiv.

: Breishis 24:62 "Boh Miboi"

This was the only one of the mekoros you cited that really proves that
Rashi holds that lashon hoveh is different than sheim hapo'al. "Mibo"
could be treated as "from coming" or "from being one-who-comes". However,
"boh" becomes more difficult as a noun. It is much simpler to
say that Yitzchak was coming [back] from coming to Be'eir Lachai
Ro'i. Alternatively, we would have to say that Yitzchak was one who was
coming from "being one who was coming to BLR"? But that's a state of
being, not a location.

It's possible that this is exactly the difficulty that Rashi is

It's also possible that our difficulty is exactly the issue I was trying
to raise on Avodah -- that the Hashem is encouraging a view of the world
that is significantly different from the subject-event-object one that
we have. IOW, it only seems more circumlocuted to us because we are used
to looking at things the wrong way.

: Breishis 29:6 Rashi D"H Ba'ah Im Hatzoin

Here Rashi points out that the Targum distinguishes between ba'AH (here)
and BA'ah (pasuk 9). The Targum for "ba'Ah" is "asya", and is a lashon
oseh, whereas "Ba'ah" is "asas", a lashon astah. Lashon astah is what
we would call today "avar". However, the word "oseh" in Rashi's "lashon
oseh" has the same ambiguity we've been talking about. Does is mean
"one who does" or "is doing"?

(Throughout this email, capitalization in transliteration shows a
syllable stess that is mentioned in the Rashi.)

RYZKD, in private email, cited Rashi on Shemos 30:25. Rashi comments
that "roKEI'ach" is a sheim davar. He is saying that the pasuk means
"made by a grinder" not "made through grinding".

Last, in another private email RYZKD brought Rashi on Ber' 4:22. Rashi
makes a statement that I couldn't follow without nikud. (I only had a
Bar Ilan CD with me in the hospital, not one of my better chumashim.) He
writes that choREISH ("o" representing kamatz katan, as opposed to our
mesorah which has a cholam over the ches) isn't a lashon po'el/pu'al
but rather a lashon pu'al/po'el (both are pei vuv ayin lamed).

Whatever the answer, it's still not relevent to our discussion. 
Po'el vs. pu'al is an adjective question too. Are we talking about all
people who are choreish, or those who recieve charishah?


Micha Berger                 When you come to a place of darkness,
micha@aishdas.org            you do not chase out the darkness with a broom.
http://www.aishdas.org       You light a candle.
(973) 916-0287                  - R' Yekusiel Halbserstam of Klausenberg zt"l

Go to top.

Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 19:16:27 +0300
From: "fishman" <fish9999@012.net.il>

I'm new to e-mail so excuse any errors pleaase.Isaw many people writing in
your mailing about combing hair on Shabbat and why it is assur. I think it
would help them to study the Gemara in Nazir 42 which says that the issur of
combing hair is to prohibit the removal of even "nimin hameduldalin" so it is
not just the uprooting of hair that is assur. A more detailed study of the
Nazir and Shabbat issues can b found in volume one of "Yesodei Yeshurun"
page 155.
                                            Stuart Fischman

Go to top.

Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 15:46:26 -0400
From: "Edward Weidberg" <eweidberg@tor.stikeman.com>

Does anyone have any information about the behayma temaya "Hashesu'ah"
mentioned in Rashi in this week's parsha (Devorim 14:7) "sh'yesh loh shnay
gabin u'shnay shedro'os"? I heard that this animal has been identified.

KT and Gut Shabbos
Avrohom Weidberg

Go to top.

Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 15:34:22 -0500
From: "Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer" <sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>
Re: Hashesu'ah

At 03:46 PM 8/25/00 -0400, Avrohom Weidberg wrote:
>Does anyone have any information about the behayma temaya "Hashesu'ah"
>mentioned in Rashi in this week's parsha (Devorim 14:7) "sh'yesh loh shnay
>gabin u'shnay shedro'os"? I heard that this animal has been identified.

In my kids' Chumash it is identified as the double-humped camel 
(domedary?). Neat, huh?


Go to top.

Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 13:45:14 -0700 (PDT)
From: Harry Maryles <hmaryles@yahoo.com>
Re: Feelings...nothing more than feelings...

On Thu, Aug 24, 2000 at 02:06:05PM -0700, Harry Maryles wrote to Areivim:
>:                      I didn't mean to imply that
>: feelings weren't important. They are very important as
>: motivational tools in service to G-d.

Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org> wrote:
> I think they are even more central in that feelings are among the things
> doing the service is supposed to accomplish in you. According to those of us
> who follow the "temimus" fork in the hashkafic road, the goal of observance
> is self-perfection. How could having a certain set of emotional reactions
> NOT be pretty central to that goal?

Self improvement is done by adherence to G-d's commandments. If feelings
have a central role they are only a motivational role. The more perfect
one is in fulfilling the Mitzvos at the highest level, the more Temimusdik
one becomes. This has nothing to do with emotions, IMHO. Perfection
equals doing G-d's will to the utmost of one's natural ability.

>                                        And on the
> "deveikus" fork -- isn't feeling a particular way about HKBH a key, if not
> THE key, element of deveikus?

I have never been comfortable with the D'veikus approach. It relies
to heavily on subjectivity. Even though emotions are often the driving
force behind action I don't see it as the goal, or even partial goal
(as you suggest) of action. Emotions are often uncontrollable. To say
that an uncontrollable occurance is the goal of Yahadus seems to me not
the likely will of an Omnipotent G-d.

I much prefer the approach of an "Halachic Man" whereby the "medium IS
the message"... if you will. We cannot know the mind of G-d. All Man
can do is the "will" of G-d. To the extent that we fulfill that will
is to the extent that we will reap our eternal reward.

By way of example: finding the most Mehudar Arba Minim for Sukos, and
taking them with the highest level of Kavana to be Yotze the Mitzvah, is
to fulfil that Mitzva to it's highest level. The emotional component
is only relevant as an aid to Kavana and has no other relavence,
in my mind. If we feel joy in fulfilling the Mitzvah... fine, but no
extra credit is due one who feels that way. The Mitzvah's execution is
the point.

> According to the Rambam, the key is deveikus through yedi'ah. And "ratzah
> HKBH lizakos es Yisrael, lifichach hirbah lahem Torah umitzvos" to give
> plenty of opportunities to have an epiphany and gain that yedi'ah.

Does the Rambam speak of D'veikus? The term D'veikus is just too nebulous
for my taste. Unless you mean the act of trying to reach Ruach HaKodesh,
which is an altered state of conciousness acheived when one serves G-d
to the highest degree. But I'm not sure that feelings are the way to
acheive this except as an aid to serving HKBH through His Mitzvos. The
ultimate fufilment of Mitzvos would "elevate" one to a state of Ruach
HaKodesh and, finally, the penultimate state of Nevuah.


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 >