Avodah Mailing List

Volume 25: Number 231

Thu, 26 Jun 2008

• 1. Re: Heter mechira (Zev Sero)
• 2. Building settlement by non-Jewish workers permitted on Shabbat (Moshe Feldman)
• 3. Re: Mapik (Doron Beckerman)
• 4. Re: Mapik (Micha Berger)
• 5. Re: Mapik (Gershon Dubin)
• 6. Re: common sense/halacha (Michael Poppers)
• 7. Re: Korach Tzaddik Katamar Yifrach (Michael Poppers)
• 8. Re: Heroes, Victims and Kedoshim (Micha Berger)
• 9. Re: Heroes, Victims and Kedoshim (Zev Sero)
• 10. Halachic Status of Karaites (Moshe Y. Gluck)
• 11. Re: believe in ourselves (Micha Berger)
• 12. Re: Halachic Status of Karaites (Zev Sero)
• 13. Re: Loving Israel while in Chutz (Yitzhak Grossman)
• 14. Re: Loving Israel while in Chutz (Micha Berger)

Yitzhak Grossman wrote:
> Zev Sero <zev@sero.name> wrote:
>> Yitzhak Grossman wrote:
>>> Zev Sero <zev@sero.name> wrote:

>>>> 4. BTW, if the goy takes the chametz and doesn't pay, he can be sued
>>>> for the money, but the chametz is still his.  His ownership doesn't
>>>> depend on his payment.  And in the forms I've seen there's a Jewish

>>> Actually, many Poskim consider a default on payment to be possible
>>> grounds for retroactively annulling a sale.  See, e.g., Nesivos
>>> (190:7), Bah (HM 96:23), Pis'hei Teshuvah (ibid. 2) and Beis Meir (EH
>>> 90:9 s.v. Kayamim Be'azmam ... V'hinei Ha'Zarich Iyun She'hiniah Harav
>>> Ha'Maggid ...).

>> Not if there's an arev kablan.

> If / when the arev kablan refuses to pay, then the sale will still
> presumably be void, according to the aforementioned opinion.

Since the AK's chometz is presumably also included in the transaction,
he's not going to refuse to pay.  He may have trouble paying, and ask
for an extension until he can sue the goy, but he won't refuse.


-- 
Zev Sero               Something has gone seriously awry with this Court's
zev@sero.name          interpretation of the Constitution.
                                                  - Clarence Thomas

See http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/126603
<<
"It has now become clear," [Yated Ne'eman] continued, "that one sin
leads to another... and some of them [the religious-Zionists] have now
decided that the settlements must be built even on the holy Sabbath...
This grave phenomenon reminds us once again that the 'nationalist
religion' continues to break down barriers amidst a distorted scale of
values according to which, nationalist and Zionist values take
precedence over the entire Torah."
>>

Rav Gisser responded:
<< It is written in the Talmud five times, and many times in Jewish
Law, that asking a non-Jew [as above] for the purpose of acquiring a
house in the Land of Israel on the Sabbath is permitted."
>>

I don't have access to the article in Yated Neeman (it's not Deah
v'Dibbur website).  Anyone know what the argument is to forbid
non-Jewish workers from building in Eretz Yisrael on Shabbat?  Unless
they hold that the settlements will probably be given to the Arabs
anyway, and therefore this does not give us a foothold in EY?

Kol tuv,
Moshe

It's true - all Parshiyos have a Mapik Heh except Korach. Why? Beats me.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080625/bf91e739/attachment-0001.htm>

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 04:31:12PM +0300, Doron Beckerman wrote:
: It's true - all Parshiyos have a Mapik Heh except Korach. Why? Beats me.

Thinking out loud...

Mapiq hei denotes the feminine posessive. If one takes (pun intended)
the peshat that "vayiqach Qorach" refers to his taking a bad shidduch,
then the whole theme of the opening story of the parashah is the misuse
of the power of mapiq hei.

Of course, that doesn't explain it according to Rashi, who takes Unqelus
and the Tankhuma to eam that "vayiqach" means that he took himself out
of the kelal. (The Ramban objects to his peshat, and explains the tannaim
as saying that Qorach's heart took him.)

Nor am I sure how much to read into statements about parshiyos, given
that their division post-Chazal.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             "And you shall love H' your G-d with your whole
micha@aishdas.org        heart, your entire soul, and all you own."
http://www.aishdas.org   Love is not two who look at each other,
Fax: (270) 514-1507      It is two who look in the same direction.

How'd you check that?

Gershon
gershon.dubin@juno.com

-- "Doron Beckerman" <beck072@gmail.com> wrote:
It's true - all Parshiyos have a Mapik Heh except Korach. Why? Beats me. 
____________________________________________________________
Click here for great computer networking solutions!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc
/Ioyw6i3oHgMWKxDJUXdTdeUBZP5Mf1xJdamh1YiyKFM8bXUfggJFEG/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080625/44ae3e5b/attachment-0001.htm>

In Avodah Digest V25#230, RSZN noted RHS' thoughts as recorded at
http://torahweb.org/torah/2007/parsha/rsch_korach.html .  Re "emunas
chachamim," a recent Hakirah article (or, should I say, a RNER article
recently [re]published by Hakirah) is worth noting -- see
http://www.hakirah.org/Vol%205%20Rabinovitch.pdf .

All the best from
--Michael Poppers via RIM pager
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080625/bc68ca45/attachment-0001.htm>

In Avodah Digest V25#228, CRW wrote:
> Korach appeared to be seeking "kedusha" for
all Jews. However, his comment "For all the congregation are holy" was
an egregious error and missed the major point that our holiness is not
an automatic condition, but rather, a potential for which to labor,
not an assured state. <
I believe that today's VBM SALT page noted that the double "kal...kulam"
proves that Korach was referring to Revelation, hence every single ben
Yisrael, bar none, was indeed "qadosh" by virtue of being at Har Sinai when
it occurred.  That said, b'nei Yisrael pleaded to MRAH to be their
intermediary during that very period of Revelation!  If they were at a high
level of q'dushah, he was at a far-greater level.  In this and other ways,
Korach's "logic" was fatally flawed.

All the best from
--Michael Poppers via RIM pager
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080625/9dbed692/attachment-0001.htm>

On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 05:44:58PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
: Any one of them could easily have called out his willingness to shmad,
: and would have been let out.  None of them chose to do so.

Mid pillaging?

This wasn't about any alleged "saving souls". They came to a ghetto and
had themselves a pogrom. Yes, shmad would get someone out of the ghetto,
but by the time the Crusaders got there, it was too late for someone to
save themselves. The qedoshim of the tefillah are called such despite
not choosing to die for the cause.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

Micha Berger wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 05:44:58PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
> : Any one of them could easily have called out his willingness to shmad,
> : and would have been let out.  None of them chose to do so.
> 
> Mid pillaging?

Yes.  What makes you think otherwise?


> This wasn't about any alleged "saving souls". They came to a ghetto and
> had themselves a pogrom. Yes, shmad would get someone out of the ghetto,
> but by the time the Crusaders got there, it was too late for someone to
> save themselves.

What makes you think so?



-- 
Zev Sero               Something has gone seriously awry with this Court's
zev@sero.name          interpretation of the Constitution.
                                                  - Clarence Thomas

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1214132695190&;pagename=JPost%2FJP
Article%2FShowFull

or,

http://tinyurl.com/6yg87m

KT,
MYG

On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 08:53:54AM -0400, M Cohen wrote:
: I have heard many times from my rebbi (R Noach Orlowek of Torah Ohr Jer'm)
: that every Jew must know that he/she are intrinsically good.
: (and therefore should believe in themselves/have self esteem)
: his oft-quoted rayah is from birchas hashachar..
: elokai - neshama shenasata bi tehorra hi..

And of course, Slaboka and Gadlus haAdam produced what may have been
the majority of the 20th century's Torah leaders. (Okay, that's an
exageration, but not by much!)

I wrote much on this subject, given the role of anavah in mussar.
The blog category is at <http://www.aishdas.org/asp/category/anavah>,
but for an overview I pulled all the threads together into a single
notion about a month back in "In the Name of the One Who Said It"
<http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2008/05/name-of-1-who-said-it.shtml>.

Teaser:
> This conclusion [kol ha'omeir davar besheim omero...] is drawn from
> verse about Esther...
...
> Here are some of the conclusions about anavah that we have explored in
> the past:
> - Anavah is the emulation of Hashem's tzimtzum...
> - Anavah is the middle path between ga'avah (egotism) and shefeilus
>   (lowliness)....
> - Because of this, anavah motivates. It doesn't lead me to believe
>   I am too puny to get anything done, nor have me complacent in my
>   accomplishments, real or imagined. We looked at a number of
>   figures from history who erred in either direction, and portrayed
>   Esther as an example of someone who found the proper balance...
> - ... [A]navah therefore also brings happiness, contentment with one's
>   lot, one's role to play in history...
> - This is why an enigmatic gemara defines an anav as someone who always
>   prays in his maqom qavu'ah (permanent, established, location). Anavah
>   is having one place in the big whole.
...
> Anavah: knowing that one is only one letter, but that anyone could
> make oneself critical to the kashrus of the entire scroll.
...
> The process then, is the sprouting of truth. The anav knows to
> contribute to it, that he may be a mere screw, a single letter, that
> will not be famous or recorded in the annals of history. But he can
> make himself critical to reaching the end. Part of eternity.
...
> To close with another medrash (with thanks to MBD for turning it into
> song lyrics ...
>> The Rabbis taught: As the time that the messianic (i.e. annointed)
>> king is revealed, he will come and stand on the roof of the Beis
>> haMiqdash. And he makes himself heard to Israel and says, "Anavim -
>> higi'ah zeman ge'ulaskhem!..."

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             One doesn't learn mussar to be a tzaddik,
micha@aishdas.org        but to become a tzaddik.
http://www.aishdas.org                         - Rav Yisrael Salanter
Fax: (270) 514-1507

It has long seemed to me that there's a distinction many people miss,
that could explain the difference between the approaches of the Sefardi
and Ashkenazi poskim.  The fact is that they were dealing with two
different populations of Karaim.  The Rambam, etc, were dealing with
the Egyptian Karaim, who are presumably descended from the Jews who
followed Anan ben David 1300 years ago, and who have married among
themselves.  The Ashkenazi poskim were dealing with the Turkic-speaking
Karaim of the Crimea; it's my impression, from various sources, that
they are primarily descended from gerim who were converted by Kara'i
batei din, and who therefore remained halachically goyim.  It seems to
me that that is likely to have been the basis of R Yaacov Emden's psak,
which would therefore not affect the Israeli Kara'i community, which
AIUI is almost exclusively descended from the Egyptian Karaim.

-- 
Zev Sero               Something has gone seriously awry with this Court's
zev@sero.name          interpretation of the Constitution.
                                                  - Clarence Thomas

On Thu, 5 Jun 2008 15:38:32 -0400
Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org> wrote:

> On Sun, Jun 01, 2008 at 02:57:38PM +0300, Michael Makovi wrote:

> : Yes, Rambam does say that techiat hameitim is only temporary, but this
> : is a very strange idea IMHO - why would it even occur to Rambam that
> : we'd be resurrected only to die again? ...
> 
> But the Rambam himself explains why: Because justice requires the soul
> reside again in a body when judged, otherwise the defendent isn't present
> as his own trial. The Ikkarim gives a different answer: This life is

Where does Rambam say this?

...

> But the Rambam didn't "okimta techiyas hameisim away". He made it an
> ikkar emunah. A move that wasn't compelled by the sources; it was
> within his worldiew that ThM is central to defining Judaism!

Rambam in Iggeres Tehias Ha'Mesim says that belief in bodily
resuscitation most definitely *is* compelled by sources, since there are
at least some Biblical verses prophesying its occurrence that cannot be
explained away allegorically.  What is your source for the assertion
that "it was within his worldiew that ThM is central to defining
Judaism"?

> -Micha

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

On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 07:38:07PM -0400, Yitzhak Grossman wrote:
: On Thu, 5 Jun 2008 15:38:32 -0400 Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org> wrote:
: ...
:> But the Rambam himself explains why: Because justice requires the soul
:> reside again in a body when judged, otherwise the defendent isn't present
:> as his own trial. The Ikkarim gives a different answer: This life is

: Where does Rambam say this?

Igeres Techiyas haMeisim. Drawin on the mashal of the blind man and
lame man who get together to streal some figs (Sanhedrin 91b). IIUC,
he understands the yom hadin as whether or not the person has the actual
ability to resurrect.

Here's a quote from ch. 4, near the beginning:
> As I will explain in the current essay: Why should we not interpret these
> pesuqim allegorically, as we have done with many other Biblical verses,
> allegorically without their literal meaning? The reason is as follows:
> The idea of techiyas hameisim, ie, that the neshamah will return to the
> body after death, is described by Daniel in a way cannot be explained any
> way but literally: "Many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth
> will rise, some to everlasting life, and some to reproach and everlasting
> contempt." Daniel was similarly told by the mal'akh, 'Now go your way to
> the end and rest, and you shall arise to your destiny at the end of days.'

: ...
:> But the Rambam didn't "okimta techiyas hameisim away". He made it an
:> ikkar emunah. A move that wasn't compelled by the sources; it was
:> within his worldiew that ThM is central to defining Judaism!

: Rambam in Iggeres Tehias Ha'Mesim says that belief in bodily resuscitation
: most definitely *is* compelled by sources...

But making it an ikkar is not.

:                What is your source for the assertion that "it was within
: his worldiew that ThM is central to defining Judaism"?

Because it's the 13th ikkar emunah. Aren't the ikkarim the center of
his definition of Judaism?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             It's nice to be smart,
micha@aishdas.org        but it's smarter to be nice.
http://www.aishdas.org                   - R' Lazer Brody
Fax: (270) 514-1507


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 25, Issue 231
***************************************

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..."