Avodah Mailing List

Volume 24: Number 81

Wed, 28 Nov 2007

< Previous Next >
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Message: 1
From: Yitzhak Grossman <celejar@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 16:21:07 -0500
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] Apikores?


On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 16:20:21 -0500
"Moshe Y. Gluck" <mgluck@gmail.com> wrote:

[snip]

> Why will it happen anyway? Who said that there would be gravity without the
> RBSO decreeing that it be there every second? It seems pretty clear L'chol

Actually, the Rambam says exactly that (Sh'moneh P'rakim Ch. 8):

--- Begin Quote ---

And in this way can we say about a man when he stands and sits that he
has stood and sat by the will of God, i.e. that his nature has been
established at its creation that he shall stand and sit by his choice,
not that He desires now at the time of his standing that he shall stand
or that he shall not stand, just as He does not now desire, at the
occurrence of the falling of a particular stone, that it should fall or
not fall ...

--- End Quote ---

> Hadei'os (that I'm aware of) that if the RBSO would stop actively being
> Mechayeh the world every instant it would be Chozer L'Tohu Va'vohu. The laws
> of physics are part of the world, and so are you and I. Tomer Devorah
> (1:1-2) puts it well (for another kabbalistic POV supporting Hashgachah
> Pratis) when he says that the RBSO actively keeps a person alive even though
> he had aveiros, when Shuras Hadin would require that Hashem remove his
> support for the actions against him.   

You say Le'chol Ha'dei'os, but I only know of Kabbalistic
sources who maintain this; I don't believe that the (medieval)
rationalists accepted any such thing.

> KT,
> MYG

Yitzhak
--
Bein Din Ledin - bdl.freehostia.com
An advanced discussion of Hoshen Mishpat




Go to top.

Message: 2
From: "Richard Wolberg" <cantorwolberg@cox.net>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 20:18:21 -0500
Subject:
[Avodah] Taryag mitzvos


"So how did Ya'akov avinu keep 613 mitzvos when it is impossible for any
individual to keep all 613 anyway?"

 

As a matter of fact, there are many mitzvos which we are not required to
observe. For instance, a "Get" is a mitzvah but that doesn't mean you have
to divorce your spouse.

 

Tzitzis is a mitzvah but d'oraita you don't have to wear tzitzis unless you
have a four cornered garment.

 

Shechita is a mitzvah, but you don't have to observe it if you don't eat
meat.

 

Mezuzah is a mitzvah, but you don't need a mezuzah if you live in your
automobile.

 

And so the list goes on...

 

Best regards/Kol tuv.

ri

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/private.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20071127/af700275/attachment-0001.html 


Go to top.

Message: 3
From: "Rich, Joel" <JRich@sibson.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 20:42:50 -0500
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] Fables and Lies



  Our modern alienation from myth is unprecedented.  In the pre-modern
world, mythology was indispensible.  It not only helped people make
sense of their lives but also revealed regions of the human mind that
would otherwise have remained inaccessible ... "

I would probably add that of course there are life giving, life
affirming, myths, and destructive, death myths, and some of the
(post)modern studies of mythology do not, to my mind, sufficiently
distinguish between the two (I was not joking about the apikorsis).  But
I tend to think there is still quite a bit of value in these studies,
because they are able to explain in modern language something that I
think we moderns sometimes forget, which is how to more fully understand
some of our own texts.


Regards

Chana


========================================================================
==========
I agree that Ela Ezkara is a valuable myth and the description "  Our
modern alienation from myth is unprecedented.  In the pre-modern world,
mythology was indispensable.  It not only helped people make sense of
their lives but also revealed regions of the human mind that would
otherwise have remained inaccessible ... " beautifully articulated
something I've always felt (perhaps based on a limited but extremely
valuable high school and college literature education)

The problem I've tried to articulate is that (and it's really ironic
that you describe it as a "moderns" problems) those of us without a
sense of history (that a premodern world existed with its own rules)
read these as fact and assume if you don't you are an apikores.  Of
course one might argue that the talmud was written for all generations
and thus knew that the myth issue would come up yet was still written
this way because......

KT
Joel Rich
THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE 
ADDRESSEE.  IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL 
INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE.  Dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 
strictly prohibited.  If you received this message in error, please notify us 
immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message.  
Thank you.




Go to top.

Message: 4
From: "kennethgmiller@juno.com" <kennethgmiller@juno.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 02:13:22 GMT
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] Kashrus Question


R' Yitzchok Levine wrote:
> One person who is involved in the supervision of a donut
> store told me that they actually visit the store on Pesach.
> If they did not, then they would have to kasher the place
> after Pesach, he wrote.
> So I have to ask (again), "These donuts that are manufactured
> on Pesach under supervision are kosher for whom? What does
> this supervision on Pesach mean?" I presume that the sign
> saying the store is under supervision is not removed on Pesach.

First of all, I do not understand why you are not satisfied with what that person told you. Throughout Pesach, the store is certified as following the regular Kashrus laws, but not the more restrictive Pesach laws. Thus, it is good for the Jewish consumer that the store is supervised even on Pesach, because the store will not need to be kashered from treif to kosher when Pesach ends.

Why is the sign left up over Pesach? One reason could simply be convenience, to avoid the hassle of taking it down and putting it back up. For another reason, see next paragraph.

"For whom?" A big chunk of the kosher market is indeed non-Jewish. Vegetarians and others find that kosher-certified items often meet the requirements of what they're looking for. Sometimes our rules aren't quite as strict as they'd like, but many will prefer a kosher-certified donut shop to a totally nonkosher one. And Pesach has nothing to do with this.

(Examples of where kashrus would not meet their needs: Hindus like kosher dairy restaurants because they don't serve beef, but I wonder if there might be some kosher cheeses nowadays that are made in a halachic manner with beef rennet. Muslims like all kosher restaurants because they don't serve pork, but they probably don't want the alcohol found in some flavorings.)

Akiva Miller




Go to top.

Message: 5
From: Harry Weiss <hjweiss@panix.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 00:17:02 -0500 (EST)
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] Kashrus Question


> From: "Prof. Levine" <llevine@stevens.edu>
>
> So I have to ask (again), "These donuts that are manufactured on
> Pesach under supervision are kosher for whom? What does this
> supervision on Pesach mean?" I presume that the sign saying the store
> is under supervision is not removed on Pesach.

It means that the product still meets the requirement for the rest of the 
year.  If they freez the donuts they can be used by any Jew after Pesach.

Rubahkin does not loose its hasgacha during the nine days and we do not 
throw out all of the dairy product in our house after each fleishig meal. 
We may not be allowed to eat it at that time for other reasons, but that 
does not make the product not kosher.
>

Harry J. Weiss
hjweiss@panix.com



Go to top.

Message: 6
From: "Jonathan Baker" <jjbaker@panix.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 00:21:54 -0500 (EST)
Subject:
[Avodah] Was Lavan daft, dense or ...


From: "Micha Berger" <micha@aishdas.org>
> On Sat, November 17, 2007 12:46 pm, R Arie Folger wrote:

> : I believe that the answer is obvious: reshaim, afilu 'al pit'hah shel
> : gehinnam einam 'hozrim bitshuvah. If Lavan wants AZ, he will justify
> : AZ no matter what the proofs against it, including miraculous
> : revelation.
 
> I am not sure I agree. Yes, someone could explain away proofs. And
> someone could after time (say, 40 days) start questioning the validity
> of revelation.
 
> However, beshe'as ma'aseh, it would seem that nevu'ah is an
> incontravertably real experience. This is how a number of rishonim

Unless it's a vision.

> explain Avraham's certainty that he was told by the RBSO to kill his
> son, despite it being more likely to come from the Satan or being out
> in the sun too long, or a dream of some other sort.

The uncensored Efodi on Guide 2:46 suggests just that: even Jonah in the
fish and the Akeidah were also visionary, not real, experiences.  Avraham
was tuned into God, so the vision meant something.  Lavan was not, so it 
meant less or nothing.
 
> I am therefore inclined to agree with the earlier posters who
> suggested that to a polytheist or henotheist like Lavan, accepting
> Yaaqov's G-d didn't have anything to do with rejecting his own
> deities.

So we seem to have four interpretations:

RAF: Never underestimate the human will to be stupid and worship AZ in the
       teeth of the evidence.
RZS: Hashem was only first among equals, so the message was only one factor
       in Lavan's actions.
RDE: Anthropological: terafim were symbols of household power, so keep them
       with the major family unit.
RSBA: Magickal: fortune-telling talking head would give away their position.

If the [non-Mosaic] revelation to Lavan was visionary, he could easily 
discount it, since he wasn't attuned to God-talk.  This might be a fifth
reading, or a support to the first two.

--
        name: jon baker              web: http://www.panix.com/~jjbaker
     address: jjbaker@panix.com     blog: http://thanbook.blogspot.com



Go to top.

Message: 7
From: Arie Folger <afolger@aishdas.org>
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 09:17:22 +0100
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] piyyutim


RET wrote:
> Question: There are also piyyutim in the middle of birchat kriyat
> shema. Even in the chassidic shuls that I
> davened in they skipped these. Does anyone know of any community that
> still says these?

Absolutely, We do, as do other yeckische minjonim. In fact, in EY, there is 
alittle revival going on.

> Related there is a one line piyut right after Borchu that is said. Why
> is that different?
You mean aur aulom beautzar chayim auraus meaufel omar vayehi? That is a one 
liner that is said after the birkas yautzer aur to indicate that we will say 
a yautzer (which follows immediately after that line). Some claim indeed that 
when there are no yautzraus, even though an aufan, a meauroh, an ahawoh, a 
zulas or a geuloh will be said, aur aulom should not be recited (we recite it 
anyway, which, IMO, is an error).

> Even in shemonei esrei there is a consensus which piyyutim are
> skipped. In fact Artscroll puts them in an appendix.
> Anyone have any idea how this came about?

partly it is the result of popularity, probably induced by tunes and by active 
participation.

However, it is also partly a result of content.

The connection between the siluq and the 'amidoh is generally most tenuous, 
hence it is left out by many communities. The keduschaus make the duration of 
keduschoh too long (can you imagine everybody standing for such a long time?) 
and make us lose the beautiful structure of the terse regular keduschoh. The 
piyutim to Malkhuyaus, Zikhraunaus and Schaufraus similarly make us lose the 
10-pessuqim structure of each.
-- 
Arie Folger
http://www.ariefolger.googlepages.com



Go to top.

Message: 8
From: Arie Folger <afolger@aishdas.org>
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 09:37:12 +0100
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] What is Mindfulness and does Judaism have it


RRW wrote:
> I don't know if the hinuch aualifies as ?an ultra-rationalist. he states
> that the point of these mitzvos is our character development

My problem wasn't with the idea that mitzvos refine our character, but in 
seeing the value of bizayon hamitzvot as meaning to lead to kavod between 
people. I think that the dislike of bizayon hamitzvot should lead to respect 
to HQBH and His Torah. Of course, that includes bein adam le'haveiroh, but we 
are emphasizing the bein adam lamaqom here.

-- 
Arie Folger
http://www.ariefolger.googlepages.com



Go to top.

Message: 9
From: Arie Folger <afolger@aishdas.org>
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 09:44:30 +0100
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] Was Lavan daft, dense or what?


RMB wrote:
> However, beshe'as ma'aseh, it would seem that nevu'ah is an
> incontravertably real experience. This is how a number of rishonim
> explain Avraham's certainty that he was told by the RBSO to kill his
> son, despite it being more likely to come from the Satan or being out
> in the sun too long, or a dream of some other sort.

This statement was at the core of my argument. My conclusion, based of Lavan's 
story, is that even with such a most powerful experience, our biases can 
prevent us from accepting the consequences. When Lavan felt the nevuah, he 
knew it was unlike anything paganism offered. However, his innate bias, his 
innate subjectivity, cultivated through years of pagan existence, allowed him 
to dismiss the uniqueness of the situation. And so does every skeptic when 
seeing G"d's signature anywhere.

Bias, in other words, does prevent us from seeing the Truth.
-- 
Arie Folger
http://www.ariefolger.googlepages.com



Go to top.

Message: 10
From: Arie Folger <afolger@aishdas.org>
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 09:50:31 +0100
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] Fables and Lies -- The poem Ayleh Ezke'rah


On Tuesday, 27. November 2007 04.41:49 avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org wrote:
> The more serious problem in the poem is that it portrays the kohain gadol
> as lifting the severed head of the nasi and bemoaning his fate. ?This is a
> very dramatic scene. ?But --- since a skull causes tuma'at meit, how could
> the kohain gadol lift the severed head of the nasi? ?
>
<SNIP>
> The more troubling possibility is that the paytan's literary skills
> exceeded his halachic awareness. ?It is also surprising how few people seem
> to have noticed this problem (as indeed, I had not for several decades!).

IIRC there are those, amongst the authorities understanding the whole story to 
be set in the Hadrianic period, who believe that he was neither kohen nor 
kohen gadol, but that kohen gadol is euphemism for grand rabbi.

The Talmudim and Midrash Shir haSirim tell us a Rabbi Yishma'el was martyred, 
but there is no mention of a RY Kohen Gado. According to Eikhah Rabbah, he 
wasn't Rabbi Yishma'el, but Rabban Shim'on ben [Raban] Gamliel [haZaqen]. 
(bracketed text only according to those who posit that they died around 
the 'hurban.)

Note that even Rabbi 'aqiva doesn't appear in all accounts (Eikhah Rabbah, 
Midrash Tehillim/Sho'her Tov, Heikhalot Rabbati, Midrash Shir haShirim).
-- 
Arie Folger
http://www.ariefolger.googlepages.com



Go to top.

Message: 11
From: "SBA" <sba@sba2.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 23:16:37 +1100
Subject:
[Avodah] : Fwd: piyyutim


From: "Eli Turkel" < >
Subject
Question: There are also piyyutim in the middle of birchat kriyat
shema. Even in the chassidic shuls that I
davened in they skipped these. Does anyone know of any community that
still says these?
>>

Yep - in our main minyan (nusach Ashkenaz).

>>Related there is a one line piyut right after Borchu that is said. Why
is that different?

And what about the sometimes lengthy singing and ya-ba-bay-ing during Keil
Adon? Why isn't that considered a hefsek?

And AFAIK even Chassidim say yotzros after borchu on Yomim Noroim.
Why isn't it a hefsek then?

>>Even in shemonei esrei there is a consensus which piyyutim are
skipped. In fact Artscroll puts them in an appendix.
Anyone have any idea how this came about?

This is probably so only in shuls without a minhag and mesorah.
And it was probably for the reason that very few were saying the long
pieces. 

SBA





Go to top.

Message: 12
From: "SBA" <sba@sba2.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 23:59:40 +1100
Subject:
[Avodah] C: we don't rely on manuscripts of Rishonim to


From: JRich@Sibson.com
There is a famous statement of the Chazon Ish that we don't rely on
manuscripts of Rishonim to overturn psikei halacha. In other words,even if
we know for sure that the psak is based on an erroneous girsait doesn't
matter, that version was accepted by the mesora. __
---
and the chazon ish based this position on 

>>

The SR zt'l also held like the CI.

Their reasoning is that the earlier gemoros/girsaos went through the hands
of Rishonim and Achronim - baalei Ruach Hakodesh who had seyata dishmaya to
see the emes.

There is a page about this topic in the sefer Butzina Kadisha vol 1 (by Reb
Sender Deutsch) where he also quotes from a kadmon RM Taku in 'Ksav Tamim'
that there were manuscripts forged my minim 'lehatos es haolom'..

(The CI is in Kovetz Igros  32)

SBA







Go to top.

Message: 13
From: "Micha Berger" <micha@aishdas.org>
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 17:57:18 -0500 (EST)
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] C: we don't rely on manuscripts of Rishonim to


On Wed, November 28, 2007 7:59 am, SBA wrote:
: The SR zt'l also held like the CI.
: Their reasoning is that the earlier gemoros/girsaos went through the
: hands of Rishonim and Achronim - baalei Ruach Hakodesh who had seyata
: dishmaya to see the emes.

IIRC (from discussion in volume 12) , the CI had a much more
rationalistic explanation.

Who knows what girsaos haven't been found? Maybe there is a good
reason why this copy was the one that ended up in genizah? If we open
up the door to changing halakhah on these grounds, ein ladavar sof!

IIRC, R' Moshe Bleich (in Tradition, not Avodah) quoted the CI that he
/would/ switch the text to Ben Asher's -- if it were found. Which
seems to fit the "who said this girsa is any better idea?" rather than
the "siyata diShmaya one". Here, it's siyata diShmaya that we don't
have the text the Rambam (et al) said was a better idea.

SheTir'u baTov!
-micha

-- 
Micha Berger             One who kills his inclination is as though he
micha@aishdas.org        brought an offering. But to bring an offering,
http://www.aishdas.org   you must know where to slaughter and what
Fax: (270) 514-1507      parts to offer.        - R' Simcha Zissel Ziv




Go to top.

Message: 14
From: Elliott Shevin <eshevin@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 14:11:55 -0500
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] Kashrus Question



> One person who is involved in the supervision of a donut store told > me that they actually visit the store on Pesach. If they did not, > then they would have to kasher the place after Pesach, he wrote.> > So I have to ask (again), "These donuts that are manufactured on > Pesach under supervision are kosher for whom? What does this > supervision on Pesach mean?" I presume that the sign saying the store > is under supervision is not removed on Pesach. Hasn't your anecdote obviated the need for an answer to the question? It's not that the donuts are being supervised so that they might be kosher for anyone *during* Pesach. The "meaning" of the supervisionis that there won't be any problems once their kashrus becomes relevant again.  Elly
_________________________________________________________________
You keep typing, we keep giving. Download Messenger and join the i?m Initiative now.
http://im.live.com/messenger/im/home/?source=TAGLM
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/private.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20071128/9cf845cd/attachment.htm 

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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 24, Issue 81
**************************************

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 >