Avodah Mailing List

Volume 27: Number 58

Fri, 26 Feb 2010

• 1. zachor (Eli Turkel)
• 2. Re: any makor (rabbirichwol...@gmail.com)
• 3. Re: kol hamosif, gorea (hankman)
• 4. Re: kol hamoseif gorea (rabbirichwol...@gmail.com)
• 5. : Right foot forward (SBA)
• 6. revenge (Meir Rabi)
• 7. Gemara Chulin and the Science of Genetics (Meir Rabi)
• 8. Who Said This? How could he say that? (Meir Rabi)
• 9. hipil 'pur' (Saul.Z.New...@kp.org)
• 10. Mishlo'ach Manot and Community Building (rabbirichwolpoe@gmail.com)
• 11. Re: Who Said This? How could he say that? (Yosef Skolnick)
• 12. Re: : any makor (Moshe Y. Gluck)
• 13. Any Makor (Esther and Aryeh Frimer)
• 14. Re: kreplach on Purim (Moshe Y. Gluck)
• 15. Culturally questionable Purim costumes (Arie Folger)
• 16. Re: kol hamosif, gorea (David Riceman)
• 17. Re: kol hamosif, gorea (Micha Berger)
• 18. Re: kol hamosif, gorea (David Riceman)

<<The Acharonim note that both the reader and listener must have the
proper intention to fulfill the mitzva.  The Taz  claims that this
applies even to the berakhot recited before the reading, and that one
who does not hear the berakhot does not fulfill the obligation. This
raises the interesting question of the extent to which the Rabbis
defined the mitzva of zekhirat Amalek as the reading (or listening to)
the portion from the Torah with its blessings.  The Taz apparently
believes that the mitzva must be fulfilled within the formal context
of keriat ha-Torah, which of course includes the blessings preceding
and concluding the portion.>>

RYBS assumes the mitzvah is hearing the parsha from the baal koreh. He
brings the minhag of his father (who always got the aliyah) to NOT
read along with the baal koreh for zachor.
While fora normal aliyah one should read along with the baal koreh
that is because one
ideally should read oneself.
However, for zachor was keeps the mitzvah through shomea ke-oneh and
therefore reading
along would result in doing the mitzvah twice simultaneously


-- 
Eli Turkel

rabbirichwol...@gmail.com wrote:
: But doesn't the m'chabeir state that zachor and para are d'orraisso

Micha:
> I see them as matbei'os derabbanan for fulfilling a deOraisa.
> Which is why I cited Chaim's discussion of the Peri Megadim, who holds
> that when they make such a matbei'ah, one doesn't even fulfill the
> deOraisa if you do something else for it instead.
> RSM obvious didn't reach the Peri Megadim's conclusion.

I'm not posting to dispute this rather
I merely wish to ADD that I sense that RSM has an additional subtle
agenda, and one that I was hinting at it, too

Namely, there were at times - such as this - a halachic drift from
Rishonim to Acharonim

And I suspect RSM was illustrating that drift by showing a piece of Shas
- that had been rejected by Rishonim as being normative - morphed into
becoming normative by acharonim.

FP
RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

I (CM) previously wrote:

>> I guess the upshot is if they were (all) not aware of ?true and correct
>> science, then this implies a failing in their gadlus in limud haTorah not
>> just in their knowledge of secular studies, which in turn implies we have 
>> a
>> lack in "emunas Chazal" if we do not reject this?
>

RET responded:

> The gemara explicitly asks questions of doctors including nonJewish ones.
> The gemara implies that doctors in Egypt knew medical procedures not
> known by anyone else. Why would chazal ask outside opinions
> and even do experiments if they knew everything from sodot?
> R. Akiva explains pesukim based on what he learned in his travels to
> Africa and other places. Abaye quotes his nurse with her advice.
> The maid of Rebbi Yehuda haNasi was admired for her knowledge
> of  Hebrew more than most tannaim. So we explicitly see that chazal were
> willing to take advice and knowledge from all sources.
>
>
> Eli Turkel
>


CM responds:

Please just explain how you understand the two medroshim I quoted above. 
1)"Histakel be'Oraisa ubara alma,"  2) "behiborom" - "behaiborom"? Does this 
mean that science is embedded in Torah or not?

Also what type of information do you think is implied when Chazal speak of 
sodos of maaseh beraishis? (Obviously we do not have these details or they 
would not be sodos, but just a general qualitative notion of the subject 
matter?)

Ultimately, perhaps I should question my own axioms. Are there things buried 
so deeply within Torah that no man can reach, or is all information therein 
intended to be reached by at least some man perhaps only the greatest like 
Moshe Rab.

Kol Tuv

Chaim Manaster
 

RET
> If chazal envisioned man landing on the moon why would they
> "lo yachol lingoa bach" to the beracha of kiddush levana?

I think torah and TSBP is often far more poetic than literal. This is
unfortunately lost on most Americans

If I had the time and the will I would write a monograph of how the
discontinuation of reciting Piyyutim brought calamity to Judaism by
causimg it to become overly prosaic.

Frelichen Purim
RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

From: "Gershon Dubin" To: 

When we were about to walk our son to the chupa, the caterer asked us to
stop, and start out "the last mile" on the right foot.  Is there any Jewish
reason/source for this?
>>

Minhag Yisroel Torah brings the Minhag of the Shamash calling out "Mitten
rechten Fees" - Sefer hamatamim and Shulcha HaEzer

SBA

The greatest revenge is the admission by the aggressor of their mistake and
their profound regret.
When the time PG arrives for the building of the BHaMikDash, the rights to
drive the bulldozer used to clear the area will be auctioned off. Who will
be given the honour of accomplishing this great cleansing? Which rabbi ry or
rk?
none of the above.
It will be the leaders of the worshippers of that spirit who will delight in
demonstrating their regret by cleansing the world.

That is true revenge "before our eyes"

meir
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100226/14c77dd8/attachment-0001.htm>

Intro
A Ben PeKuAh is a calf extracted from a slaughtered mother.
A calf born to parents that are both Benei PeKuAh is also a BP.
If before the cow's Shechitah the calf extends, for example, its right
hindleg into the "air of this world" then the entire calf other than its
leg, is a BP. That leg however, is not BP and can not ever be made Kosher.

Genetics (Apparently)
Chulin 69a explains that R Yirmiya (and all the other Sages) knew that if a
cow and bull both having this defective right hind-leg, produce a calf, that
calf will be irreversibly non-Kosher.
The explanation for this in the Gemara is that there are only two options:
A) there is a direct correlation between the limbs and organs of the parents
and the corresponding limbs and organs of their progeny; or B) there is no
such direct correspondence and the reproductive energies are a Bilbul a
mixture of the kosher BP component and the non-K leg component.

The Gemara then notes that since we do not observe EVERY calf born to
parents having a [congenital] defect to also bear that same defect; we must
conclude that the reproductive energies are all mixed and thus the calf of
the two "blemished" BP is completely and irreversibly non-K.

Would anyone like to comment on this Gemara? or my reading of it?


meir
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100226/d2a9c496/attachment-0001.htm>

It is one of the Rishonim who said that if not for being intimidated he
would have ruled that Chamets is Battel on Pesach as per the regulat
guidelines of Bittul, BUT he was worried of being labelled as that Rabbi The
Meikel.

Rabbenu Tam. quoted by Rabbeinu Peretz Pesachim second chapter.

Question:  How could he say that?
This is Assur, the judges and the rabbi s are instructed NOT to be
intimidated but to state their opinion without prejudice or fear?

meir
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100226/f799bfbc/attachment-0001.htm>

RABBI FOHRMAN  on the  language  of  the 9th  chapter  of  megilat  esther

upshot ---  analogy to  hafarat  heder  by a  ba'al --  the only other 
place  where hacharesh yacharish  appears ;  the  use  of  'kiyum'   ; 
bottom line  passive  aggressive  achashveirosh says  my hands  are  tied 
a  second  decreee doesnt annul the  1st;  mordechai's PR efforts  to 
prevent  a pogrom [ the importance  of the second day --shushan--for if 
the rebelliion  didnt  end  quickly the revach would  disapppear ]; and 
esther  being  told you unlike the mapik hei    'ishahh'  can't  be 
cheresh--it's  up to  you ; 
 
 
http://www.s213209882.onlinehome.us/Rabbi_David_Fohrman_Why_the_
name_Purim.mp3 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100225/9c3bac52/attachment-0001.htm>

Some hashqafah on Mishloah Manos

NishmaBlog: Mishlo'ach Manot and Community Building
http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/2010/02/mishloach-manot-and-c
ommunity-building.html

Freilichen Purim
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 4:47 PM, Meir Rabi <meir...@gmail.com> wrote:

> It is one of the Rishonim who said that if not for being intimidated he
> would have ruled that Chamets is Battel on Pesach as per the regulat
> guidelines of Bittul, BUT he was worried of being labelled as that Rabbi The
> Meikel.
>
> Rabbenu Tam. quoted by Rabbeinu Peretz Pesachim second chapter.
>
> Question:  How could he say that?
> This is Assur, the judges and the rabbi s are instructed NOT to be
> intimidated but to state their opinion without prejudice or fear?
>
> meir
>

He just did say it :-).  If he was really afraid to say it he wouldn't have
put it like that.  He would have just left out that halacha.  I was in the
semicha shiur for a few months, and while there we were taught that whenever
a posek says "If I were not afraid I would say" (which is how all the meikel
psakim start off) that is his true opinion and how he paskens li'halacha.

Yosef Skolnick
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100225/88d06551/attachment-0001.htm>

From: Saul.Z.New...@kp.org
have? seen in MO? synagogues , usually by mincha of? shabbos? zachor? ,? a 
?second 'layning'? of? zachor? for those? who missed.? is? one yotze with 
this---with no bracha before? and after?
-----------------


In one Shul I know, the Rov doesn't allow a second leining for ladies,
because they aren't mechuyavos, so it isn't Kavod to take the Sefer out...

KT,
MYG

It is a prevalent custom worldwide[i] to have a second Megilla reading for 
women; yet no provisions are made to have a minyan of ten men present.


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


refers to these second Megilla readings for women as the "takana gedola" 
(important innovation) of Bnei Brak.



--------------------------------
Dr. Aryeh A. Frimer
Chemistry Dept., Bar-Ilan University
Ramat Gan 52900, ISRAEL
E-mail: Fri...@mail.biu.ac.il

RMB:
What I want top know is if RMF would say that all those remazim and
sodos are fulfilled if I drank low alcohol wine or grape juice. Notice
he defines the din as drinking wine, not drinking alcoholic beverages.
------------


women can be (and should be) Yotzeh their chiyuv to drink a reviis yayin at
the seudah with grape juice. (Page 129, see the footnotes, too.)

KT,
MYG

What are the parameters of 'huqot hagoyim. Shul'han 'Arukh YD 178
includes among the prohibition of 'huqot hagoyim the prohibition to
wear costumes specifically associated with idol worship.

Over on my blog, I posted about some weird Purim costumes. I assure
you I am not inappropriately posting to Avodah, having a headstart on
'ad delo yada'. The issue is that the two costumes I show, both
recently photographed, are really Christian costumes, but somehow
found their way into the Jewish Purim arsenal.

This reminds me of the times when Sukkot decorations were leftover
X-Mas lots. Some of that stuff is innocuous, and since they were not
muqdash le'avodah zara', and are not clearly connected to some other
religion, most of those are OK (though my wife once made me
incorporate a home made menorah in one, to be megayer that particular
decoration that had too much red and green). The reason is that these
are not, as per the SA's language (ad loc.) *meyu'hadim* to the idol
worshipers. Pretty shiny streamers and stars are not particular to any
specific culture. (or is it? Correct me if I am wrong in YOUR
opinion.)

But what about dress that is more explicitly tied to foreign religious
celebrations or religious orders, are these not violations of 'huqot
hagoyim? Is it sufficient that in their neighborhood they are unaware
of the Christian connection, or do they remain assur since most of
their non-Yerushlami neighbors, ten blocks down, would recognize
these?

At issue are two costumes, one of girls dressed as nuns, but with a
magen david (and upon reflection, that means they are likely not
'Hareidim) and a family in Meah She'arim all dressed up in red
costumes with white trimmings, reminiscent of some famous fictional
character associated with gifts at some major Christian holiday. I am
operating here under the reasonable assumption that they are unaware
of the Christian connection.

Can one unknowingly transgress 'huqot hagoyim, meaning, when knowing
the halakha but not knowing of the cultural connection? Does it matter
when the clothing in question is not associated with AZ in that
neighborhood?

Thoughts? Halakhic arguments here on the thread, humorous comments
over on my blog: http://ariefolger.wordpress.com/ .

Comments denigrating any particular demographic for their culturally
sheltered lifestyle will neither be tolerated here, nor there.

A freilekh'n Pierem,
--
Arie Folger,
Recent blog posts on http://ariefolger.wordpress.com/
* Weird Purim Costumes
* From Skinhead to Orthodox Jew
* Kommender Vortrag am 7. M?rz
* Should Our Ancestors Have Needed a Mishkan?
* How German Built the Hebrew Language
* Is the New Israel Fund Indirectly Responsible for the Goldstone
Blood Libel? (en & de)



-- 
Arie Folger,
Recent blog posts on http://ariefolger.wordpress.com/
* Weird Purim Costumes
* From Skinhead to Orthodox Jew
* Kommender Vortrag am 7. M?rz
* Should Our Ancestors Have Needed a Mishkan?
* How German Built the Hebrew Language
* Is the New Israel Fund Indirectly Responsible for the Goldstone
Blood Libel? (en & de)

hankman wrote:
> Please just explain how you understand the two medroshim I quoted 
> above. 1)"Histakel be'Oraisa ubara alma,"  2) "behiborom" - 
> "behaiborom"? Does this mean that science is embedded in Torah or not?
I just don't understand this.  You cite two recondite midrashim, and 
expect us all to follow your (apparent) deduction that they indicate 
that Hazal knew calculus, when they mention neither Hazal nor calculus.  
Perhaps you can spell out your reasoning in more detail.

David Riceman

On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 11:40:11AM -0500, hankman wrote:
: Please just explain how you understand the two medroshim I quoted above. 
: 1)"Histakel be'Oraisa ubara alma,"  2) "behiborom" - "behaiborom"? Does 
: this mean that science is embedded in Torah or not?

I assume they mean that the world was created to fit the Torah, not the
other way around.

I have a much further elaboration about layers of abstraction and olamos
in the Maimonidian Qabbalah category of my blog, but defending that would
get involved. Let's just say that the Zohar (source of #1) meant that as
the Or "descended" from higher olamos to this one, the level at which it
expresses itself as the Torah is logically prior and causes that where
it expresses itself as physics.

But knowing that the ideas in the Torah caused the world to be as it is
doesn't mean that a human being is capable of tracing back how HQBH got
from Torah to olam by studying the Torah. In the case of chuqim, we
can't even undertstand how HQBH got from Torah to Torah.

: Also what type of information do you think is implied when Chazal speak of 
: sodos of maaseh beraishis? (Obviously we do not have these details or they 
: would not be sodos, but just a general qualitative notion of the subject 
: matter?)

Personally, the topics qabbalah addresses -- the metaphysics that
explains how the One created the many, and thus how the universe
operates "mei'achorei hapargod".

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             When we are no longer able to change a situation
mi...@aishdas.org        -- just think of an incurable disease such as
http://www.aishdas.org   inoperable cancer -- we are challenged to change
Fax: (270) 514-1507      ourselves.      - Victor Frankl (MSfM)

Micha Berger wrote:
> Let's just say that the Zohar (source of #1)
See Midrash Rabba 1:1.  And see Theodor-Albeck's notes, which cite Philo 
as the ultimate source.

David Riceman



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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 27, Issue 58
**************************************

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..."