Avodah Mailing List

Volume 23: Number 221

Tue, 09 Oct 2007

< Previous Next >
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Message: 1
From: "Richard Wolpoe" <rabbirichwolpoe@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 14:01:24 -0400
Subject:
[Avodah] Secular Thoughts on Sh'miras Halashon


I used to carry around with me in my wallet some inspirational quotes. I had
one for many years and I was trying to find it on the net.
Instead I found an original quote and I will share that with you first:

Great people talk about ideas,
average people talk about things,and small people talk about wine.*Fran
Lebowitz <http://www.quotationspage.com/quotes/Fran_Lebowitz/>*
*US writer and humorist (1950 - )*



As  I read it in Anne Landers many, many years ago it was paraphrased
thusly:
Great people talk about ideas,
average people talk about things,and small people talk about other
people.[disclaimer:
I cannot be certain first. I am only guessing that the Fran Lebowitz quote
came first]

The wonderful thing about lists such as Avodah and other Torah based
discussions is the opportunity to have high-level discussions about great
ideas, concepts, b'iyyun rav.

The danger about the Internet in general is that the temptation to engage in
ad hominems is greater than ever.
The solution? Attack the idea if you will- - but not the author of the idea!

-- 
Kol Tuv / Best Regards,
RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com
Please Visit:
http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/private.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20071009/7539bffe/attachment.html 


Go to top.

Message: 2
From: Dov Bloom <dovb@netvision.net.il>
Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2007 21:12:51 +0300
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] Vayoel Moshe- misrepresntations


regalkit@aol.com wrote: The sefer [VaYoel Moshe], in my humble opinion, is full of these misrepresentations; can someone guide me as to how I can understand a Godol Hador's writings?

For anyone bothered or interested by seeming misrepresentations by the Satmar Rebbe in VaYoel Moshe,  I would suggest they study HaTekufa HaGedola by R Menachem Mendel Kasher, mechaber of the Torah Shleima Series.

This work is in many ways an answer to the shitot of the SR, showing how the predominant opinions in Chazal, Rishonim Achronim and Gedolim in the last few generations are in great contradistinction to the SR's hashkafa. 

RMMK frequently quotes "unnamed" sfarim / authors which are usually the VM or similar hashkafot. For example, see p. 189 (kuf pe tet) where he quotes an unnamed "mechaber" who brought down and argued with an "incorrrect" peirush of the "apikorsim" to the Yalkut Eicha. RMMK shows that this peirush attributed by the unnamed machaber to the apikorsim  is found given by R Yisrael Zeev Halevi, the Av Beit Din of R Moshe Teitelbaum, the Yismach Moshe. So, RMMK states in a footnote, the "peirush zar she-meyachaso le-apikorsim, mevoar basefer she-mechabro haya Rosh Beit Din etzel zekano zt'l " (the "strange" explanation he attributes to apikorsim in expounded in a book authored by the Head of his grandfather's Rabbinical Court).  Without  ever mentioning by name who exactly it is who is the grandson of the Yismach Moshe that attributed this peirush to apikorsim.

All through HaTekufa HaGedola I don't recall him mentioning the SR by name, always "I saw a mechaber who wrote" or someone asked RMMK about what he saw in an unnamed "sefer echad". See for instance pp. 177, 195, 205, 260 and many more times in HaTekufa HaGedola. 

I believe it was RMMK's way of writing in a "derech eretz" manner not to mention the SR by name.

Chapter 13 for instance rejects the view of "sefer echad" who said that leaving churches standing in the Old City after 1967 is "lo ta'avdum vehu bichlal yehareg ve-al yaavor ... ". This unnamed "sefer echad" concludes that the conquerers of the old city in 67 thus became ovdei AZ mamash. RMMK shows this is incorrect.

Chapter 15 explains what "Sitra Achra" means, quoting encyclopediacly every early reference to SA in Targum, Zohar etc. He shows how attributing the events in 1967 in EY to the Sitra Achra is incorrect. RMMK quotes for instance an explicit Zohar VaYera 108 b 
"ve-arah de-yisrael lo shalit ba mal'acha memana achara ela eihu belichadohi" 
(in Eretz Yisrael no dominance is given to angels or other appointed powers but only to Him [hashem] himself). 
See also Zohar Truma 173 - "kol inun marei  Sitra Achra d'Ruach MeSaava lo shalte be-arah kadisha". So RMMK concludes the shita of the unnamed mechaber attributing seemingly miraculous events in EY (cefeating numerous Arab armies, capture of the Old City and Mekom HaMikdash) to the SA is incorrect. 

Conclusion: Dont learn VM without HaTekufa HaGedola! 

You wouldn't learn Menachem without Dunash, the Ktzot without the Netivot, or the Mechaber without the Rema! 

More accurately, you wouldn't learn the rejected calender shitot of Ben Meir without Saadya Gaon's responses, you wouldn't delve in to the grammatical opinions of Ben Naftali without learning about the accepted opinions of Ben Asher. Don't learn only the VM without knowing the mainstream hashkafot.




Go to top.

Message: 3
From: "Sholom Simon" <sholom@aishdas.org>
Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 16:25:12 -0400 (EDT)
Subject:
[Avodah] Stability and Revision Pt. 1 Parallels


I enjoyed your tri-partite division, and look forward to your next
installment

But I was wondering if there might be more categories.

The one that stands out in my mind is "reactionism" -- i.e., in order to
distinguish ourselves from others.  Eating hot foods on shabbos is an
older instance.  A more modern one might be hiring a non-Jew to play music
on shabbos -- which apparently used to be the custom for chasunes a while
back (see S"A which expressly permits this) -- but is now sociologicall
ossur as a reactino to when Reform started to introduce music to their
prayer services.

A quick note, too, on one of your categories:

> Activism:
...
> Goal:
> To pursue a liberal or a libertarian or a libertine] agenda.  To promote
> progressivism.  Maximise rights for the people.

In halacha, activism goes both ways.  Certainly those involved in
so-called "chumra of the month" types of communities, which sometimes
spread to the rest of us.  (I can't help but wonder if women vis-a-vis
parshas zachor might be of this variety -- but one can possibly think of
others: requiring light boxes to examine lettuce, selling one's keilim for
Pesach, etc.)

> BEH I will follow up with Halachic parallels in the next post.

I look forward

-- Sholom




Go to top.

Message: 4
From: "Richard Wolpoe" <rabbirichwolpoe@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 16:41:56 -0400
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] Stability and Revision Pt. 1 Parallels


you make good poitns

the only other categoyI was going to add was "divine revelation" but of
course reation is a poitn too.

You can post a comment on  nishmablog on this

KT
RRW

On 10/9/07, Sholom Simon <sholom@aishdas.org> wrote:
>
> I enjoyed your tri-partite division, and look forward to your next
> installment
>
> But I was wondering if there might be more categories.
>
> The one that stands out in my mind is "reactionism" -- i.e., in order to
> distinguish ourselves from others.  Eating hot foods on shabbos is an
> older instance.  A more modern one might be hiring a non-Jew to play music
> on shabbos -- which apparently used to be the custom for chasunes a while
> back (see S"A which expressly permits this) -- but is now sociologicall
> ossur as a reactino to when Reform started to introduce music to their
> prayer services.
>
> A quick note, too, on one of your categories:
>
> > Activism:
> ...
> > Goal:
> > To pursue a liberal or a libertarian or a libertine] agenda.  To promote
> > progressivism.  Maximise rights for the people.
>
> In halacha, activism goes both ways.  Certainly those involved in
> so-called "chumra of the month" types of communities, which sometimes
> spread to the rest of us.  (I can't help but wonder if women vis-a-vis
> parshas zachor might be of this variety -- but one can possibly think of
> others: requiring light boxes to examine lettuce, selling one's keilim for
> Pesach, etc.)
>
> > BEH I will follow up with Halachic parallels in the next post.
>
> I look forward
>
> -- Sholom
>
>


-- 
Kol Tuv / Best Regards,
RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com
Please Visit:
http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/private.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20071009/4c9d8e64/attachment.htm 


Go to top.

Message: 5
From: "Eli Turkel" <eliturkel@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 22:41:48 +0200
Subject:
[Avodah] reasons for mitzvot


An old question is the connection between reasons for mitzvot and
their observance.
One important application is shemitta. I recently saw that even R. Lau
was disturbed
by modern observance.
It is clear from the Torah that the purpose of shemitta is an
extension of the rest
of shabbat to a seventh year and a chance for spiritual reflection. In
addition it
gives the poor the hefker fruits/vegetables from the fields.

In our modern society few religious Jews live off of agriculture. I
saw a cute article
on applying the concepts to computers. Every seven years one does not develop
new software and only preserves what one has.

More seriously modern day poskim concentrate on ways of avoiding shemitta
by hydroponics, importing from outside the country etc. These suggestions all
give nothing for rejunevation or the poor. The stress of poskim is on
details rather
than the message. Instead we ruin Jewish agriculture with the only plus being
the new business for Arab and European agriculture at our expense.
While some few religious kibbutzin may have some sabbatical type program for
the average city dweller does nothing to improve our religiousity.

kol tuv

-- 
Eli Turkel



Go to top.

Message: 6
From: "Moshe Feldman" <moshe.feldman@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 21:20:54 +0200
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] [Areivim] Shemitta in the UK


On 10/8/07, Dov Kay <dov_kay@hotmail.co.uk> wrote on Areivim:
> Over Sukkos, I attended a shiur given by Dayan O Westheim, formerly of the
> Manchester Beth Din and a kashrus bigwig (and I'm not referring to his
> streiml).  The bottom line was that, in the UK, one must avoid all Israeli
> vegetable products, but may rely on rov in cases of doubt, which is
> generally the case (unless the product is labelled as coming from Israel).
> He also concluded that all cherry tomatoes in the UK are forbidden because
> most originate in Israel, even those labelled as originating from other
> countries (especially Holland).
<snip>
> The whole thing leaves me feeling uncomfortable, as I am aware that what is
> being advocated is, essentially, a boycott of Israeli products which will
> only weaken the Israeli economy and give our enemies a stronger hold on the
> land.  The Dayan referred in passing to the heter mechira as if it were no
> more applicable than the Get of Cleves.  Of course, that is entirely his
> pregorative as a posek and as a leading posek in this town, I feel
> constrained to follow his rulings, but it does leave me agreeing with R. A.
> Lichtenstein that shemitta is a "halachic tragedy", as it is a halacha which
> simply cannot be implemented and practised the way it was originally
> intended, no matter which method one uses.

If you have a posek that you rely on, are you required to be machmir
just because the leading posek in your town is machmir?  Does the
Dayan have the title "mara d'asra," and even if he does, is that
mechayev you in the era of globalization?

Kol tuv,
Moshe



Go to top.

Message: 7
From: saul mashbaum <smash52@netvision.net.il>
Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2007 23:44:46 +0200
Subject:
[Avodah] Rationalism and Mysticism


RR Wolberg: 
>>
The first posuk of the Torah: ?Bereshis bara...? etc. has 7 words and twenty-eight letters.  <snip>the posuk immediately prior to the Aseret Hadibrot (Shmos 20:1): ?Vay?daber Elohim es kol had?vorim ha?eyleh leimor? has 7 words and twenty-eight letters.  
?In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.? The foundational purpose of creation is ?Y?hei sh?mei rabba...? and the way that can be effected is ?Vay?daber Elohim es kol had?vorim ha?eyleh leimor?.
>>
We recently mentioned here the connection between the asara maamarot through which the world was created and the aseret hadibrot.  The above gives us a new insight into this connection.
Saul Mashbaum
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/private.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20071009/12acc2d7/attachment-0001.html 


Go to top.

Message: 8
From: saul mashbaum <smash52@netvision.net.il>
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 00:04:25 +0200
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] literalism


RRWolpoe gives several example of Talmudic phrases and principles which are not to be taken perfectly literally, among which he includes "bdikat chametz" and "n'tillat lulav".
I accept  his examples of "ein bein... ellah", and "michemet reshut", as parallel to our previously discussion of "chalitza b'makom yibum eina mitzva"; all these may indeed be not entirely literal. 
However, I don't think non-literal phrases or terms like bdikat chametz and n'tillat lulav are examples of the idea which we have been discussing. Once we have determined what n'tillat lulav means, or b'dikat chametz is, all Talmudic statements about these practices are to be taken fully literally.The existence of non-literal *terms*, a common feature in any language,  does not justify the conclusion that the legal statements made by chazal may sometimes be taken non-literally (a position which nevertheless I believe to be correct).  
Saul Mashbaum
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/private.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20071010/9b25a6ec/attachment-0001.htm 


Go to top.

Message: 9
From: "Richard Wolpoe" <rabbirichwolpoe@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 15:52:31 -0400
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] mechitza


On 10/9/07, Dov Kay <dov_kay@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
>  I have just been learning OC, 315, where the MB and AhS both quote the
> Mordechai in Perek Kirah that one may erect a temporary partition between
> men and women when a drasha is given.  This is evidence that:
> 1  women attended droshos in the Mordechai's time and locality;
> 2  there was felt to be a need for a mechitza at such a gathering (contra
> the R.YYW's comment that this was not the case in early 20th century
> Lita); and
> 3  women perhaps did not attend shul or stood outside, or else why did he
> not refer to erection of a mechitza in a shul, espcially since shul services
> are more frequent than droshos.
>
> Kol tuv
> Dov Kay
>

Thre is a Gmar in the end of Kiddushun that CLAERLY rquires separate seating
during Shabbas Afternon drashos.

That said, it ws to prevent co-mingling it does not addresseing SEEING
women.

More later BEH




-- 
Kol Tuv / Best Regards,
RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com
Please Visit:
http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/private.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20071009/8c5c72b0/attachment.html 


Go to top.

Message: 10
From: "Joseph C. Kaplan" <jkaplan@tenzerlunin.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 16:44:14 -0400
Subject:
[Avodah] mechitza


Re RAF's story about ROY being shliach tzibbur at Lincoln Square Synagogue.  I know it didn't happen while R. Riskin was there.  While it is possible it happened afterwards (there were two rabbis between R. Riskin and the current rabbi), I highly doubt that it happened at all.

Joseph Kaplan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/private.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20071009/d770688b/attachment.htm 


Go to top.

Message: 11
From: T613K@aol.com
Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 17:09:30 EDT
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] mechitza


 
 
From: "Moshe Y. Gluck" _mgluck@gmail.com_ (mailto:mgluck@gmail.com) 

>>Not everyone  agrees that the Halachah has changed - one Rav I know is of 
the
opinion that  while meritorious, there is no Chiyuv for women to hear
Parashas Zachor, and  he thus refuses to allow the Sefer Torah to be taken
out on Shabbos afternoon  for a second, women's, reading.<<




>>>>>
 
My husband thinks that women have a mitzva of zachor ("zachor es asher  asa 
lecha Amalek") but don't have to hear the parsha to be yotzei -- they are  
yotzei by hearing the Megillah.  When my kids were little I sometimes I  relied on 
that loophole.  Also I don't remember anyone making a fuss about  girls 
having to be in shul for Parshas Zachor when I was a girl -- maybe that's  a 
chassidish vs litvish thing? In general, Litvaks seem to be expect more of  women 
but/and are also more text (vs mimetic) oriented.  Anyway, my  memories, or lack 
of memories, seem to support what RZS said about this  only having become 
widespread in the last 30 years or so.   



--Toby  Katz
=============



************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/private.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20071009/fa1e616e/attachment.html 

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


Avodah mailing list
Avodah@lists.aishdas.org
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 23, Issue 221
***************************************

Send Avodah mailing list submissions to
	avodah@lists.aishdas.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org

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..."


< Previous Next >