Avodah Mailing List

Volume 23: Number 108

Mon, 14 May 2007

< Previous Next >
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Message: 1
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 15:40:30 -0400
Re: [Avodah] Yeshiva is a Mikva to a Ben or Bat Niddah

On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 05:26:39PM -0400, Madjsolomon@aol.com wrote:
: The question of  marriage to a Ben or Bat Niddah is not a new one (see EH 
: 4:13, and the comment  of the Vilna Gaon there who explains that this is in
: fact not a spiritual blemish but instead an indication that such a
: person will have a deficiency in character).  

I am not sure of the reality of the distinction being made.

I realize this is just R' Yisrael Salanter's rationalism talking, but
leshitaso, are a spiritual pegam and a character defect different things?

Tir'u baTov!

Go to top.

Message: 2
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 16:40:42 -0400
Re: [Avodah] Right vs. Wrong; Tzaddik vs. Rasha

On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 02:19:18AM +0300, Shoshana L. Boublil wrote:
: I do believe that it is a choice we make: do we concern ourselves with 
: ourselves and our connection to Hashem, or do we concern ourselves with the 
: Other and their connection to Hashem?

I'm reminded of R' Yisrael Salanter's observation. It is common to catch
someone outside announcing that they were looking for a "tenster" for
their minya. But how often does someone stand outside offering food so
that they can have a se'udah?

I'm not sure if this truism is from the same shtikl in Tenu'as haMussar
or a separate quote: Spirituality is concern for my soul and your stomach.

: I generally prefer Rav Kook's take on this matter:

As do I, it's one of the quotes in my random signature generator. (Which
has special behavior for the omer, so I couldn't easily get the quote
on this email.)

: HaTzaddikim HaTehorim Einam Kovlim Al HaRish'a -- Ela Mosifim Tzedek
: Einam Kovlim Al HaKefira -- Ela Mosifim Emunah
: Einam Kovlim Al HaBa'arut -- Ela Mosifim Chochmah (Orot HaKodesh part III)

To answer subsequent questions: This is descriptive of tzadiqim tehorim,
and therefore prescriptive for the rest of us who should be trying to
become tzadiqim tehorim ourselves.

Tir'u baTov!

Micha Berger             Today is the 40th day, which is
micha@aishdas.org        5 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Hod sheb'Yesod: When does
Fax: (270) 514-1507      reliability/self-control mean submitting to others?

Go to top.

Message: 3
From: "Eli Turkel" <eliturkel@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 21:38:08 +0200
[Avodah] opera

And was it standard practice for THE gedolim of Germany to attend?
And is there any evidence that others besides RSRH did so -
and whether he did so regularly or just once or twice?
And why would RYBS fave acted differently in Boston to Germany?>>

In YU RYBS told talmidim that opera was prohibited because of kol isha.
So I don't believe the story

Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070513/01eea74b/attachment-0001.html 

Go to top.

Message: 4
From: "reuven koss" <kmr5@zahav.net.il>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 23:18:46 +0300
Re: [Avodah] Yizkor second day yom tov in E'Y

> Message: 14
> Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 11:59:11 EDT
> From: T613K@aol.com
> Subject: [Avodah] Yizkor second day yom tov in E'Y
> To: avodah@lists.aishdas.org
> Message-ID: <c0b.13aaeb72.33788fcf@aol.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> What do you chevra think about this?  I'm going to be in Israel for 
> Shavuos
> IY"H and am wondering what to do about Yizkor.   Do I say it  on the 
> second
> day at a chu'l  minyan in a yeshiva near my mother's  house?  If so, what 
> do I
> do the first day when they say Yizkor in the  regular shul -- leave, stay 
> but
> don't say Yizkor, say Yizkor and then say it  again the next day?  Or do I 
> have
> to daven both days in the chu'l  minyan?
> --Toby  Katz
> =============

In the sefer yom tov sheni kehilchoso, he poskins that if one davens on the 
second day with a chutznik minyon than one says it on the second day. He 
brings a machlokes regarding leaving the shul during yizkor on  the first 

Go to top.

Message: 5
From: "reuven koss" <kmr5@zahav.net.il>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 23:22:14 +0300
Re: [Avodah] kerias sheni shel pesach

> Also the extraordinarily long reading of the first day of chol hamoed
> Pesach, which is of course the reading for the second day of Pesach
> in chu"l.  Why not cut it down a bit, to make it similar in length to
> the other chol hamoed readings?
> -- 
> Zev Sero

          Dina d'gemara

Go to top.

Message: 6
From: "A & C Walters" <acwalters@bluebottle.com>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 23:49:54 +0300
[Avodah] Maariv Bezman

There is a similar halocho brought down beshaim the Gr"o, that davening
maariv bezaman (after tzais) without a minyan is better than davening
earlier (from Plag) with a minyan, even on shabbos. Does anyone know what
his mekor for this is, befrat the Gemoro says "Ravi Tzali shabbos beerev

"Danny Schoemann" <doniels@gmail.com> wrote in message
> R' Michael Kopinsky asked:
> Does anyone know of psakim on the permissibility/recommendability of 
> davening netz, thereby missing tefillah b'tzibbur?

Get a free email address with REAL anti-spam protection.

Go to top.

Message: 7
From: "kennethgmiller@juno.com" <kennethgmiller@juno.com>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 20:51:59 GMT
Re: [Avodah] Mechallel Shemitah beFarhesia

R' Arie Folger wrote:
> This perhaps shows the problem with relying too much on
> ta'amei hamitzvot. In the case of Shabbat, the Torah
> explicitly makes that link (Shemot 20:11), in the case of
> shemittah, I can't recall such a link.

R' Micha Berger responded:
> I fail to see a "problem". I found your reaction akin to
> someone raising a question based on a Rav Chaim and getting
> a reply that his question shows the problem with relying on
> lomdus. Lehefech, the questioner was looking for more lomdus!

Exactly! You are presuming that your question is based on lomdish 
concepts. But maybe it's not.

Maybe the concept of equating a mechalel Shabbos befarhesia and a 
mumar lekhol haTorah kulah is *not* a lomdish concept. Maybe it is 
more sociology-based.

My point is that perhaps -- and I stress the "perhaps", because I 
really don't know -- this concept has nothing to do with lofty 
drashos about Shabbos being a bris, or Shabbos being an os, or any 
such thing. Perhaps it is simply a declaration that Shabbos is such a 
recognizably public aspect of being Jewish, that public violations of 
it constitute a virtual treason. And if so, there is no high-falutin' 
talk you can come up with which might put shemitta into such a 

Evidence for this possibility: IIRC, only a *public* Chilul Shabbos 
qualifies for this. IIRC, only a melacha *l'hachis* qualifies. And 
IIRC, only a *well-known* melacha qualifies. Sure sounds to me more 
like a "public policy" issue than some sort of lomdish vort.

Akiva Miller

Go to top.

Message: 8
From: Arie Folger <afolger@aishdas.org>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 23:24:31 +0200
Re: [Avodah] Mechallel Shemitah beFarhesia

RMB wrote:
> What the question shows is that there is a more complex relationship
> between shemittah and ma'aseh bereishis than that of Shabbos.
> Something for the Chinukh's or RSRH's successors to work with to
> produce a more subtle, nuanced and meaningful understanding of
> shemittah.

That a public Shabbat desecrator is considered to be kofeir bema'aseh 
vereishit is fairly easy to grasp, since the Torah makes the link between 
Shabbat and ma'aseh vereishit. However, shemittah is not explicitly linked 
with MB. Hence, a shemittah desecrator wouldn't be transgressing something 
which is explicitly linked with one of the foundations of belief. Any link 
between Shabbat and shemittah seems IMHO too indirect to make shemittah 
desecration equal kofeir bema'aseh vereishit.

I hope that in the current rewording it no longer seems like my objection 
isakin to someone raising a question based on a Rav Chaim and getting a reply 
that his question shows the problem with relying on lomdus." BTW, when I 
complained against using ta'amei hamitzvot in that way, it was because we 
should differentiate between that, which is arrived at through plain reading, 
and that, which is arrived at through philosophical speculation. The latter 
may be true, as well, but doesn't carry the same weight.

Arie Folger

Go to top.

Message: 9
From: "Samuel Svarc" <ssvarc@yeshivanet.com>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 17:24:19 -0400
Re: [Avodah] Giving up one's place in line

>From: "Elazar M. Teitz" <remt@juno.com>
>Subject: Re: [Avodah] Avodah Digest, Vol 23, Issue 106
>     The comment was made about a gadol baTorah that "if I could give
>him my place on line (something that is not always halachically
>proper) I would do it."
>     If "giving my place" means letting him in before you, though
>there are others behind you, when is it ever halachically proper,
>since it is chav la'acheirim? And if "giving my place" means
>exchanging places, giving up your place and going to the end of the
>line in his place, when is it ever halachically improper?

When exchanging places would be chav la'cheirim to people who aren't on the
line, like one's wife waiting anxiously for the purchase. Or one's employee,
or... I think we get the picture that there is more to take into account
then just the people on the line.


Go to top.

Message: 10
From: Daniel Eidensohn <yadmoshe@012.net.il>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2007 00:29:52 -0400
Re: [Avodah] Ahavat Yisrael

Michael Elzufon wrote:
> Reb' Shoshana L. Boublil wrote:
>> Actually, Rav Kook quotes the Chafetz Chaim in his book "Ahavat Chesed". 
>> The Chafetz Chaim quotes Rabbi Yehonatan Vohliner: The Din that it is 
>> allowed or a Mitzva to hate people that don't follow the straight path, is 
>> only after you reproved (Hochichuhu), but it is forbidden to hate him until 
>> all the options have been tried.  And, as the Tana'im have already informed 
>> us "Temeihani Im Yesh BaDor HaZeh SheYode'ah LeHochi'ach" (Arachin 16b) 
>> Mimeila, it is forbidden (!!!!-SLB) to hate anyone.
>> Rav Kook continues that nowadays, we are not supposed to use the educational 
>> tools of Sin'a at all!

>> Apparently the Chofetz Chaim distinguished between a wayward individual 
>> and a group of deviant people who are undermining the community.
>> The Mishna Berura in Biur Halacha (1:1), bottom of page 8, "However if a 
>> person is in a place where there are apikorsim who rebel against the 
>> Torah and want to make some decree concerning public matters and because 
>> of that will cause the people to transgress G-d's will. You should 
>> approach them peacefully but if they won't listen ... it is a mitzva to 
>> hate them and to fight them and to nullify their desgns in any way 
>> possible. We know that Dovid (Tehilim 139:21-2) said 'I hate those who 
>> hate You and I will fight against those who rebel against You and I hate 
>> them with pure hatred.' "
>> Daniel Eidensohn
>> [MJE] What is the distinction?  Both cases have either a heter or a hiyuv to hate and both condition this on first approaching them peacefully.
>> _______________________________________________
I was simply assuming that the original citation provided in the name of 
the Chofetz Chaim was accurate and thus concerning an individual there 
is no basis to hate today since we don't know how to chastise. I wanted 
to reconcile it with his clear statement in the Mishna Berura that 
hatred is relevant today. However since it has now been asserted that 
the Chofetz Chaim never claimed that we don't know how to chastise - 
there was no need for the reconcilation.
Daniel Eidensohn

Go to top.

Message: 11
From: "Shoshana L. Boublil" <toramada@bezeqint.net>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2007 00:58:52 +0300
[Avodah] Rabbi Isak Unna of Mannheim (was Re: Rav Unno)

> Subject: [Avodah] Rav Unno
> Message-ID: <000301c79544$5fdb49b0$0301010a@sbaws1nnv993q7>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="Windows-1252";
> reply-type=original
> From: "Meir Shinnar" <>
> Issur of kol isha only applies to the problem of saying davar
> shebikdusha in its presence (tshuva of Rav Unno, the Rav of
> Mannheim before the war, justifiying having choruses of girls
> sing - arguing that this was ikkar hadin

> Am I the only person here who has never heard of him before?

> And seriously, where CAN one find out more about him?

Here: Try googling for Rabbi Isak Unna of Mannheim.

Here is just one of the many resources where he is, respectfully, 


Testimony No. 1

Place: Mannheim, a major port city on the Rhine in the state of 
Baden-W?rttemberg in western Germany
Mannheim had a beit midrash that had been headed by renowned rabbis, 
including Rabbi Jacob Ettlinger and Rabbi Isak Unna (who later moved to 
Eretz Israel). This beit midrash served as a center for Orthodox Jewry until 
the Holocaust. On April 1, 1933 (Boycott Day in Germany), shortly after the 
Nazis rose to power, the interior of the Mannheim synagogue was destroyed, 
and on Kristallnacht the synagogue was burned completely.

Apparently Rabbi Unna has published on various topics.

I found a short entry on him, perhaps someone could translate it from 

Unna, Dr. Isak (geb. 1872 W?rzburg, gest. 1948 Jerusalem, m?tterlicherseits 
ein Enkel des "W?rzburger Raw" Seligmann B?r Bamberger): studierte in 
W?rzburg und Berlin, zun?chst Rabbinatsassistent in Frankfurt am Main, seit 
1898 Klaus-Rb in Mannheim, seit 1920 3. StadtRb in Mannheim (1924 
KonferenzRb des Oberrats, Exponent des gesetzestreuen Judentums, seit 1932 
Vorsitzender der "Gesetzestreuen Rabbinervereinigung Deutschlands", schrieb 
ein Werk zur Geschichte der Klaus-Synagoge Mannheim), Sept. 1935 nach Erez 
Jisrael eingewandert, Autor einer posthum 1964 in Jerusalem herausgegebenen 
Sammlung rabbinischer Gutachten (Responsen).

Shoshana L. Boublil

Go to top.

Message: 12
From: David Riceman <driceman@att.net>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 19:12:52 -0400
Re: [Avodah] Torah Study vs. other contributions to soCIETY

Samuel Svarc wrote:
> <me>
>>  see Tshuvoth HaRama #7.
> <RMSS>
> Um, I looked at it, and it discusses if it's "prohibited". I fail to see why
> you keep on circling back to this point that wasn't in our discussion.
The purported prohibition it discusses is the permissibility of studying Greek philosophy, not of spending time away from Torah.  The Rama told his cousin the Maharshal that he spent some of his time studying philosophy, even though ikkar zman limudo was halacha, and the Maharshal called him on the substance of what he studied, but neither of them thought that it was inappropriate for the future gadol hador to spend time away from Torah.  According to you both of them should have agreed that this was inappropriate behavior.

David Riceman

Go to top.

Message: 13
From: "Elazar M. Teitz" <remt@juno.com>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 23:41:59 GMT
Re: [Avodah] Yizkor second day yom tov in E'Y

<there's a lot I don't understand about the way the chu"l
minhagim of keriat hatorah were transplanted to EY, which I presume
happened when Jews came back after the crusaders.  For instance, *why*
don't they read Aser Te'aser on Shemini Atzeret, which is its zeman,
and then read Vezot Haberacha either a) immediately after, b) at 
mincha of the same day, or c) on the following Shabbat together with 
     Mei'ikar hadin, Aser T'aser is not part of the Shmini Atzeres 
k'riah at all when it is a weekday.  The g'mara in M'gilla 31a lists 
it as Kol Hab'chor, the same as acharon shel Pesach, and neither the 
M'chaber nor the Ramo say to start from Aser T'aser on a weekday.  It 
is mentioned by the Magen Avraham as a minhag, because it is onas 
hama'asros.  Kol Hab'chor has the same role as it does on the other 
r'galim -- the k'riah for the day that "isn't there" in EY, and since 
apparently V'zos Hab'racha was intended for the finale of the Yom 
Tov, it's the eighth day which has the "extra" k'riah in chu"l.

     That's why, on a weekday SA, the kohein reads all of Aser 
T'aser, into Kol Hab'chor -- a total of 31 p'sukim, leaving 17 for 
the other four aliyos combined: because it would not be proper for an 
entire aliyah not to be part of the chovas hayom. It is similar to 
what the MB mentions about Chanukkah, that those whose minhag it is 
to start the first day's k'riah with birkas Kohanim should not make 
it the full first aliyah, but should continue into Vayhi b'yom kalos 
Moshe, so as not to have an aliyah no part of which is chovas 
hak'riah. (Incidentally, the Metzuda machzor seems not to have been 
aware of this, and on a weekday SA makes two full aliyahs before Kol 


Go to top.

Message: 14
From: "Moshe Yehuda Gluck" <mgluck@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 20:05:41 -0400
[Avodah] Tochachah

I davened, this Shabbos, in a Flatbush Chassidishe Shtible. After the Aliyah
before the Tochachah, someone gave a "Klop" on the Bimah, and the Ba'al
Koreh immediately continued to read the Tochachah - without making the
Brachos on the Torah, and without there being an Olah. After he finished
(again, without a Brochah), they resumed their regular scheduled
programming. Has anyone ever seen this Minhag before? Does it have a Mekor
in the Poskim?




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070513/4c77bf1f/attachment.htm 

Go to top.

Message: 15
From: T613K@aol.com
Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 21:43:20 EDT
Re: [Avodah] fashion models and opera singers

>>Not being a opera buff, I don't know too much about  this.
But MUST an opera always have a female singer?

And was it  standard practice for THE gedolim of Germany to attend?
And is there any  evidence that others besides RSRH did so -
and whether he did so regularly  or just once or twice?<<


I don't know how to check it out but I doubt that RSR Hirsch actually  ever 
went to the opera.
Re your other question -- must an opera have female singers? -- they used  to 
 have castrati, male sopranos.  I'm sure it's assur for bnai Noach  to do 
such a thing but once it's done, would it be mutar for a Jew to benefit  (by 
going to hear one of those poor mutilated men sing)?  I actually once  heard a 
recording of the last of the castrati (sorry I can't remember what the  singular 
is) -- a recording made in around 1910 of a man who had been operated  on as a 
child probably fifty or sixty years before that.  Was I even  allowed to 
listen to that recording on the radio?  

--Toby  Katz

************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070513/4ae0ddc6/attachment.html 


Avodah mailing list

End of Avodah Digest, Vol 23, Issue 108

Send Avodah mailing list submissions to

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to

You can reach the person managing the list at

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Avodah digest..."

< Previous Next >