Avodah Mailing List

Volume 33: Number 165

Thu, 24 Dec 2015

• 1. Is it Musar to Buy Chocolate? (Michael Poppers)
• 2. Re: Anthropic Principle (Jay F. Shachter)
• 3. What's the message? (Moshe Zeldman)
• 4. Re: What's the message? (Micha Berger)
• 5. Re: What's the message? (Rich, Joel)
• 6. Mezuzos on Fire Emergency Stairwells (Micha Berger)
• 7. Slichot (Rich, Joel)
• 8. Re: Halacha as a System and Deriving halachah for new situations (two subjects for the price of one!) (David Riceman)
• 9. Plain Speaking Profundity: Rav Shimon Schwab Speaks (Prof. Levine)
• 10. Re: Halacha as a System and Deriving halachah for new situations (two subjects for the price of one!) (David Riceman)
• 11. duchening in aretz (Rich, Joel)
• 12. asara betevet (Eli Turkel)

In Avodah V33n164, RZS replied to RYGB:
>> That is not the "sinfully" or "decadently" delicious chocolate that I
had in mind... <<
> 70% is quite delicious.  90% is a taste one can acquire, and then enjoy
without qualms. <
I think RYGB is referring to confectionery (e.g. Godiva truffles) rather
than plain chocolate (e.g. Hershey's Special Dark).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-a
ishdas.org/attachments/20151220/87f28f53/attachment.html>

Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2015 18:48:06 -0500
From: Micha Berger via Avodah
> SciAm ran this article last month on 5 of the really finely tuned
> aspects of physics without which we wouldn't be here.
> <http://j.mp/1QRZqyY>

I'm a member of a book club in which we all take turns recommending a
book to the others. We meet once a month, and we have a little over a
dozen active members, so that means that a little less often than once
a year, the book club reads my recommendation.

Normally the person who chose the book begins each discussion by
introducing it, and explaining why he or she chose it. On a couple
of occasions, however, I have written up my introduction in advance,
and put it on my website, and asked everyone to read it before coming
to the meeting. This saves about ten minutes of discussion time, so we
have more time to discuss the book.

One of the books I recommended was "Just Six Numbers" by Martin Rees,
which addressed the topic of the above-cited Scientific American article
in book-length detail. It was one of the books to which I prepared a
written introduction on my website; the interested reader can find a
link to it on http://m5.chicago.il.us/intro.html.


                        Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter
                                j...@m5.chicago.il.us
                                http://m5.chicago.il.us

                        "Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur"

I've been an active listener on this list for a few years now, but I
have a very pertinent question that needs input from thinking people
such as yourselves.

Am Yisroel is facing the threat of militant Islam on many fronts: daily
terrorism, nuclear Iran, the rise of militant Islam across Europe and the
world. I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that, derech hateva,
we're facing a serious existential threat. The question is: What's our
response? The Gemara says that when we face yisurim, we're supposed to
be "mifashpesh b'maasav... nachpesa dracheinu v'nachkora". Which I think
means more than just to daven for the problems to go away, and certainly
more than just to rely on hasbara and political lobbying. What's the
specific message?

Is there any way for us to know, specifically, what Hashem wants us
to improve? Lashon Hara? Tzenius? Learning? Sinai Chinam? Rabbeinu
Tam teffilin?

On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 10:22am IST, R Moshe Zeldman wrote:
: Am Yisroel is facing the threat of militant Islam on many fronts...
:           The Gemara says that when we face yisurim, we're supposed to
: be "mifashpesh b'maasav... nachpesa dracheinu v'nachkora"...

: Is there any way for us to know, specifically, what Hashem wants us
: to improve? Lashon Hara? Tzenius? Learning? Sinai Chinam? Rabbeinu
: Tam teffilin?

I have in the past gone in two directions with this, and even though
they contradict, I find each compelling.

(Students of RYBS can invoke the word "dialectic" here.)

1- We are told how to know "yefashpeish bema'asev", and "nachpesa
daakheinu". When you feel that current events or personal troubles are
shaking you out of your rut and motivating you to change, check your
own actions and see what needs fixing and presents a goal that is in
within reach.

BTW, in Eiruvin 12b, when Batei Shamai veHillel finally conclude that it
would have been pleasanter not to have been created, there are two version
of what they conclude you should do about it: yefashpeish bema'asav or
yemashmeish bema'asav.

The common theme between proposed chiluqim between the two (Rashi,
Ritva, the Arukh) appears to be whether one is mefashpeish past actions
or yemashmeish going forward.

So, do a cheshbon hanefesh, check your own life. Don't ask us for a
one-size-fits-all solution!


2- But there is also a long tradition of gedolim suggesting particular
fixed for their community.

Perhaps (to turn the dialectic into a synthesis) this is with the
awareness that most people aren't sufficient self-aware to do an exact
cheshbon hanefesh, nor would journal for the number of nights it might
take to develop that awareness of what really needs work.

In this vein, I would suggest working on whatever issue the tzarah raises
within you without your trying.

Since we do more naturally express our underlying achdus when we as a
nation face horrible news, why not work on extending that inspiration
beyond the initial reaction to the news, and stretch it into days,
months, a permanent behavior?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             I slept and dreamt that life was joy.
mi...@aishdas.org        I awoke and found that life was duty.
http://www.aishdas.org   I worked and, behold -- duty is joy.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                        - Rabindranath Tagore

> Is there any way for us to know, specifically, what Hashem wants us
> to improve? Lashon Hara? Tzenius? Learning? Sinai Chinam? Rabbeinu
> Tam teffilin?

Kach Mkublani mbeit avi abba -- know for sure-no, try to figure it out
-definitely. Each soul knows its own shortcomings (or should be trying
to figure them out)

KT
Joel Rich

I was just on the 9th floor of this office building, and I saw that my
employer's CEO's poseiq ruled that the doors on the emergency fire
stairwells are entrances to the floor. Even though an alarm goes off
if you open the door because they are designated for emergency use
only.

That mildly surprised me, but I guess it makes sense. One could enter
the floor that way.

My floor (7), however, we only rent part of, not including the stairwells
and the halls they open to/from. Also, on my floor, the door only opens
from this side. (If you need to escape the 9th floor, the you have to
go down to 5.) It is not a re-entry floor, the way the 9th is.

Would the mezuzah still be hung as though the door were an entrance, or
would it reflect traffic from the hall down the stairs?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             The waste of time is the most extravagant
mi...@aishdas.org        of all expense.
http://www.aishdas.org                           -Theophrastus
Fax: (270) 514-1507

Due to the relatively late time of netz et al the first minyan at a local
shul said slichot before the regular davening. I'm wondering if anyone
else did this and, if yes, did they just say what they would have said
after shmoneh esrai or did they say say ashrei et al.

KT
Joel Rich

I wanted to reply to this in more detail, but after a while I couldn't 
see the forest for the trees.  So here's the forest:

RJR offered three alternatives, none of which I think is tenable.

1.  Halacha is a single unified ideal.

This can't be true for several reasons.  Drashos HaRan #7 rejects it 
because it's inconsistant with aharei rabbim l'hatos.  His solution is 
to postulate a non-ideal halachic system which he calls halacha l'fi 
ha'sechel ha'enoshi.

In addition I pointed out that there's a double layer of decision: 
voting about law is based on case law, but halacha is conceptualized 
based on rubrics.  Arrow's theorem ought to imply that there is no 
unified ideal.

RMB identified this opinion with the Rambam.  This also can't be true.  
See MN III:26 (tr. Schwartz p. 514) that while mitzvos have reasons, the 
details of mitzvos do not, and God determined them arbitrarily.  This 
can't be an "ideal" system.

2a.  Halacha is a "chronologically monotonic historical process" 
determined by God.

This also can't be true.  There are innumerable cases where later 
rishonim reject the opinions of earlier rishonim or even geonim because 
they conflict with the later rishon's construal of the gemara.  It still 
happens, though my impression is less frequently, among aharonim.  
Certainly the biur haGra on SA does this occasionally.

RMB associates this opinion with "Rashi, Ritva, Ran, and any other 
rishon we've discussed in dozens of prior iterations, except the 
Rambam".  Again this can't be true because all of these reject some of 
their predecessors' opinions based on their reading of Hazal.

2b.  Halacha is a "chronologically monotonic historical process" 
determined "because the rabbis determined this to be how an effective 
legal system must work".

I've already rejected monotonicity.  I don't know of anyone, Hazal or 
rishon, who says that this is "how an effective legal system must 
work".  It's true that the Ramban, in the introduction to Milhamos 
HaShem, says that deference to our teachers imply that we should accept 
precedent in cases where we are uncertain, but there are plenty of 
examples, even in MH, that he rejects the opinion of the Rif.  And I 
know of no one who attributed this opinion to God.

I wanted to write more on the case of tannur shel achnai.  Maybe soon.

David Riceman

 From http://tinyurl.com/ho34cgp

A public spirited Yachid has just made available for viewing 
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiN_CSnMumk>a valuable historic 
collection of several video clips of Rav Shimon Schwab zt"l, famed 
Rav of KAJ WH, and author of various renowned seforim.

See the above URL for more about the content of this video.

The video is at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiN_CSnMumk



llev...@stevens.edu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20151223/ba9ddeac/attachment-0001.htm>

I wanted to reply to this in more detail, but after a while I couldn't
see the forest for the trees. So here's the forest:

RJR offered three alternatives, none of which I think is tenable.

1. Halacha is a single unified ideal.

This can't be true for several reasons. Drashos HaRan #7 rejects it
because it's inconsistant with aharei rabbim l'hatos. His solution is
to postulate a non-ideal halachic system which he calls halacha l'fi
ha'sechel ha'enoshi.

In addition I pointed out that there's a double layer of decision: voting
about law is based on case law, but halacha is conceptualized based on
rubrics. Arrow's theorem ought to imply that there is no unified ideal.

RMB identified this opinion with the Rambam. This also can't be true.
See MN III:26 (tr. Schwartz p. 514) that while mitzvos have reasons,
the details of mitzvos do not, and God determined them arbitrarily.
This can't be an "ideal" system.

2a. Halacha is a "chronologically monotonic historical process" determined
by God.

This also can't be true. There are innumerable cases where later rishonim
reject the opinions of earlier rishonim or even geonim because they
conflict with the later rishon's construal of the gemara. It still
happens, though my impression is less frequently, among aharonim.
Certainly the biur haGra on SA does this occasionally.

RMB associates this opinion with "Rashi, Ritva, Ran, and any other rishon
we've discussed in dozens of prior iterations, except the Rambam".
Again this can't be true because all of these reject some of their
predecessors' opinions based on their reading of Hazal.

2b. Halacha is a "chronologically monotonic historical process" determined
"because the rabbis determined this to be how an effective legal system
must work".

I've already rejected monotonicity. I don't know of anyone, Hazal or
rishon, who says that this is "how an effective legal system must work".
It's true that the Ramban, in the introduction to Milhamos HaShem, says
that deference to our teachers imply that we should accept precedent
in cases where we are uncertain, but there are plenty of examples, even
in MH, that he rejects the opinion of the Rif. And I know of no one who
attributed this opinion to God.

I wanted to write more on the case of tannur shel achnai. Maybe soon.

David Riceman

What is the practice with regard to moving the chazzan for duchening in
Israel for those shuls who have the chazzan lead daily services from next
to the Aron Kodesh? Does he move?
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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20151223/7049f7c8/attachment-0001.htm>

<<Once again, AFAIK there is no reason at all to believe that if it any
other fast fell on a Friday it would be delayed.  The only fast that
*is* delayed if it falls on a Friday is Yom Kippur, not because it's
a fast (since it's delayed to Shabbos!) but because of the issur
melacha.

There *is* an opinion that in the hypothetical case that Asara B'Tevet
were to fall on Shabbos we would fast, but I believe the only reason
this opinion gets the play that it does is because it's only hypothetical.
If it were possible for it to actually happen we would not give this
opinion any consideration, and in fact it might never have been advanced
at all, since its originator would have known that we don't do that. >>

Ohr Sameach (Hil Taanait 5:6) seems to disagree with this. The gemara in
Eruvin 40b asks if one who has an individual fast on friday must complete
the fast. Ohr Sameach asks why is the question only on an individual fast
and not a taanit tzibur. He answers that since we would fast asarah betevet
on shabbat certainly we fast on friday and so there is no question.
Therefore, the gemara only asked about taanit yachid. Thus Ohr Sameach
takes the gemara of fasting on shabbat very literally.

psak: Mechaber (249:4) says one completes an individual fast from friday
through shabbat and the Ramah disagrees and says that one completes the
fast only for a public taanait.

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20151224/750671f6/attachment-0001.htm>

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



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


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


***************************************

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..."


A list of common acronyms is available at
        http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/acronyms.cgi
(They are also visible in the web archive copy of each digest.)