Avodah Mailing List

Volume 01 : Number 025

Saturday, August 22 1998

• Re: A follow up on Mitasek between - anyone else care to comment?
• Re: Psak and ratzon Hashem
• ones with chelev
• Re: ones with chelev, ve-la-na'arah lo ta'aseh davar
• daas torah
• Re: daas torah - back to the old story
• Re: daas torah - back to the old story
• RE: Shogeg/Eliyahu
• RE: Shogeg/Eliyahu
• Re: Psak and ratzon Hashem
• Re: ones with chelev, ve-la-na'arah lo ta'aseh davar
• Re: Psak and ratzon Hashem, ve-la-na'raha lo ta'aseh davar
• shlitah/gaon
• A New Group for Discussing Matters of Arayos
• Re: A New Group for Discussing Matters of Arayos

On Fri, 21 Aug 1998 cbrown@bestware.com wrote:

> ME: As for relying on a Rabbi to pasken a chalavim/arayot issue, if the
> error is factual, i.e. they pasken a treifah is kosher ac. to Tos. I guess
> you would have to bring a chatas.  However, if the error is a hachra'ah
> that a latter authority disagrees with, lets say a Shach that is cholek on
> a Taz, I don't think the Taz would have to go out and kasher his dishes and
> bring a chatas.  MAkes it kind of dangerous to be a posek! Do you
> disagree??
> >
> YGB:> Yes, I disagree - while it is imposssible to be machri'a in most
> cases, where there some mechanism to do so he would have to kasher.
> >
>

YGB here.

The truth is that I personally, as I wrote in an essay on eilu va'eilu,
believe that the theology of Judaism is that a legitimate halachic
position expressed by a posek in any generation, is a valid statement of
ratzon Hashem, and that one who follows that line is absolved from any
blame, and fulfills the mitzva to its full extent. For example, as I
wrote, there is a machlokes on which side of the doorway one should put a
mezuza when that doorway leads to an enclosed porch (Chazon Ish vs. R'
Moshe). The mitzva is fulfilled no matter which position you adopt.

But... while there are many sources that support this line of reasoning,
there is no definitive proof that it is correct. The very concept of
"ba'al nefesh yachmir" introduced by the Mishna Berura seems to run in
direct opposition to my premise. If, in theframework of halachic reality,
say, the view that requires 600,000 to constitue reshus harabbim is a
valid expression of ratzon Hashem, why need anyone take into account the
opposite view?

It seems, according to the MB's approach, that, in the absence of a
Sanhedrin, there is no mechanissm for decisive conclusion of halachic
questions. Thus, for example, it is possible on some level that Rabbeinu
Tam is correct about tefillin - in which case all of us that only put on
Rashi's are left... where?

YGB 

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

          >>>But... while there are many sources that support this line of
          reasoning,
          there is no definitive proof that it is correct. The very concept of
"ba'al nefesh yachmir" introduced by the Mishna Berura seems to run in
direct opposition to my premise. If, in theframework of halachic reality,
say, the view that requires 600,000 to constitue reshus harabbim is a valid
expression of ratzon Hashem, why need anyone take into account the opposite
view?

It seems, according to the MB's approach, that, in the absence of a
Sanhedrin, there is no mechanissm for decisive conclusion of halachic
questions. Thus, for example, it is possible on some level that Rabbeinu
Tam is correct about tefillin - in which case all of us that only put on
Rashi's are left... where?<<<

          ME here.

We are drifting afield of mitasek b'chalavim - is that good or bad :-)

I think even M"B agrees that there is a methodology of psak.When the ratzon
Hashem is clear to a posek it carries a mandate to reach absolute
conclusions, i.e.if you think you need 600,000 for reshut harabim, ignore
the other opinions. Hachra'ah is choosing what you think is the best
answer.  The problem is what if a posek has no opinion as to which is right
or wrong,he is unsure whether the ratzon hashem is to require 600,000 for a
reshus harabbim?  Obviuously you cannot define ratzon Hashem if you are in
doubt!  The solution: ba'al nefesh machmir, avoid choosing an option; try
to cover every base.

Many people have called the M"B the 'tzaddik hador'.  In that sense, his
tziddkus may have led him to entertain doubts as to the correctness of his
interpretation of ratzon hashem where others would have arrived at more
definitive conclusions.  The balance between yirat shmayim in psak and
confidence in one's opinion and ability is a fine line to draw.

-Chaim B.

I don't think you can possibly say that the suspension of the p'tur of
misasek automatically means a suspension of the p'tur of ones. THe whole
basis of the p'tur of ones is by arayos by naarah meurasah which is
obviously a case of arayos and still we say ones rachmana patrei. 

Shraga Rothbart

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

The na'arah is pturah, but did she engage in an act of arayot?  What about
"Karka olam"?

(  I'm not saying I disagree, I'm just saying I don't think its that
simple.  The fact that we use different terminology, "mitasek" vs. "ones"
sort of led me down this train of thought.)

Is this like my third message of the day today?

-CB


                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           



          Please respond to avodah@aishdas.org

          To:   avodah @ aishdas.org
          cc:   avodah-digest @ aishdas.org
          Subject:  ones with chelev




I don't think you can possibly say that the suspension of the p'tur of
misasek automatically means a suspension of the p'tur of ones. THe whole
basis of the p'tur of ones is by arayos by naarah meurasah which is
obviously a case of arayos and still we say ones rachmana patrei.

          Shraga Rothbart

          _____________________________________________________________________
          You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
          Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
          Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

A while back someone on the list asked for a makor that we follow "daas
Torah" regarding everyday decisions (jobs, wives etc.) as opposed to just
following the psak halacha of a rav. I didn't do a major search at the
time but figured that eventually I'd come across something and when i did
i would post it. Sure enough I (while reviewing michtav meliyahu) came
across a piece which suggests that we might find a makor from the story of
eliezer and rivkah. The question is asked, why did Avraham send Eliezer to
find a wife for yitzchak instead of sending yitzchak himself. The jist of
the answer is that one is blinded by the yetzer hara concerning matters
which pertain to one self. Therefore one must seek the opinion of a gadol
(who has mastered his yetzer hara) and can give a clear unbiased opinion
on
the matter. Therefore, in essence we are taught that one should seek the
opinion of a gadol (yitzchak----to Eliezer) regarding decisions such as
who one should marry. Eliezer is given Gadol status based on the gemara
in yoma (25b) which  says that Eliezer drew from the well of his masters
Torah and made it available to others
Elie Ginsparg

Gee, I'm on a roll today.  Things are slow here.

Once you are citing R' Dessler, you should know he has a whole essay on the
topic discussing how we would not have recognized Purim as miraculous had
it not been for our reliance on Chazal to interpret historical events (I
think this is chelek 4).  I'll behave and just note R' Dessler is a late
Acharon of the mussar school - proof to me usually means gemara/Rishonim,
where the concept isn't mentioned.   (For a more detailed response, see
below.)

 What I wrote on the concept last time was I don't see a difference between
emulnat chachamim and relying on a doctor when you are sick.  You are
simply consulting an expert who has more knowledge/experience then you do
in a certain area rather then rely on yourself.  I trust/believe that my
doctor can do a better job of curing my illness then I can alone, so I
consult him.  No one suggests that there is a special concept of "emunat
harofeh".  My Rav has more knowledge/experience in certain areas then I do
so I consult him in certain areas.  Denying emunat chachamim it doesn't
mean you live in a vacuum of self-reliance!  I personally felt quite
confident with my choice of wife without consulting a Rav, and I feel
confident enough that when I feel slightly ill I take over the counter cold
medicince and don't rush to the doctor.  Other people do rush to the doctor
and consult their Rav more frequently.  However, there does exist what I
would call the "halachic hyperchondriac" - the Rabbi knows all and is
infallable and I am afar v'efer and can't think for myself.

Let me directly answer the proof of R Dessler:  1) Yitzchak was one of the
Avos and hence his choice of wife is probably gar more significant then
your or mine, hence the need for greater caution.  Ask a Rav if the
situation warrants greater caution, greater experience and knowldege -
choosing one of the Imahot is definitely one of those situations!  To use
my medical analogy, this ain't your common cold.  2) Eliezer was blinded by
his own yetzer hara acc. to Rashi and wanted Yitzchak for his own daughter.
Till he found Rivkah he was hoping to fail! - Is that the sort of unbiased
shaliach you want making decisions for you?

-Chaim B.



                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           



          Please respond to avodah@aishdas.org

          To:   avodah @ aishdas.org
          cc:
          Subject:  daas torah




A while back someone on the list asked for a makor that we follow "daas
Torah" regarding everyday decisions (jobs, wives etc.) as opposed to just
          following the psak halacha of a rav. I didn't do a major search at the
          time but figured that eventually I'd come across something and when i
          did
i would post it. Sure enough I (while reviewing michtav meliyahu) came
across a piece which suggests that we might find a makor from the story of
eliezer and rivkah. The question is asked, why did Avraham send Eliezer to
find a wife for yitzchak instead of sending yitzchak himself. The jist of
the answer is that one is blinded by the yetzer hara concerning matters
which pertain to one self. Therefore one must seek the opinion of a gadol
          (who has mastered his yetzer hara) and can give a clear unbiased
          opinion
          on
          the matter. Therefore, in essence we are taught that one should seek
          the
          opinion of a gadol (yitzchak----to Eliezer) regarding decisions such
          as
          who one should marry. Eliezer is given Gadol status based on the
          gemara
          in yoma (25b) which  says that Eliezer drew from the well of his
          masters
          Torah and made it available to others
          Elie Ginsparg

In a message dated 98-08-21 13:59:05 EDT, you write:

<< Let me directly answer the proof of R Dessler:  1) Yitzchak was one of the
 Avos and hence his choice of wife is probably gar more significant then
 your or mine, hence the need for greater caution.  Ask a Rav if the
 situation warrants greater caution, greater experience and knowldege -
 choosing one of the Imahot is definitely one of those situations!  To use
 my medical analogy, this ain't your common cold.  2) Eliezer was blinded by
 his own yetzer hara acc. to Rashi and wanted Yitzchak for his own daughter.
 Till he found Rivkah he was hoping to fail! - Is that the sort of unbiased
 shaliach you want making decisions for you?
 
 -Chaim B. >>

How about Yitchak couldn't leave eretz yisrael?

Shabbat shalom
Joel

R. YGB writes:

>The source of the assumption about Eliyahu I think is the gemara in Asara
>Yuchsin where it says that he does not come letaher mamzerim - me'klal
>that he does come to rule on other issues. I believe the Brisker Rav
>somewhere says that Eliyahu comes to restore the chain of mesorah.

>But, the truth is, I was using this comment just in the context of its
>normal idiomatic usage - that something is clarified to be other than it
>seemed. I did not mean it to be precise. What I meant to depict was only
>that, since rov nowadays is not absolute as it was in the times of the
>Sanhedrin, it is possible that relying on a rov is not considered to be
>mis'asek. Who can or will overturn the rov was peripheral.

Yes, the gemara is well-known.

Regarding your explanation, I am sorry if I misunderstood your usage.
But it is precisely the assumptions underlying what you call "normal
idiomatic usage" that I wished to scrutinize.  Moreover, unless I
continue to misunderstand you, your example remains purely hypothetical.

You are correct of course that what we call "rov posekim" today is not
comparable to the rov in the Sanhedrin.  But, if Eliyahu is not going to
overturn rov posekim, who will?  Not the Sanhedrin, because a rov there
would create a shogeg.  And, realistically, posekim today do not seem
inclined to go against rov posekim.  So, practically, I do not see how
this kind of mitasek would result.

Shabbat shalom,

Eli

On Fri, 21 Aug 1998, Clark, Eli wrote:

> You are correct of course that what we call "rov posekim" today is not
> comparable to the rov in the Sanhedrin.  But, if Eliyahu is not going to
> overturn rov posekim, who will?  Not the Sanhedrin, because a rov there

Perhaps a new rov will develop! We see processes like that occur from time
to time - although not exactly the same thing, the move to almost
universal acceptance of "glatt" is similar.

> would create a shogeg.  And, realistically, posekim today do not seem

Whoa - that is my point, isn't it? That a mis'asek can revert to shogeg!

I thought that was what I was saying - perhaps I didn't get it across.

> inclined to go against rov posekim.  So, practically, I do not see how
> this kind of mitasek would result.
> 
> Shabbat shalom,
> 
> Eli
> 

YGB

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

On Fri, 21 Aug 1998 cbrown@bestware.com wrote:

> I think even M"B agrees that there is a methodology of psak.When the ratzon

I'm not sure he does. I suspect that is why rabbonim often preferred the
Aruch HaShulchan. In his in/famous essay Chaim Soloveitchik describes the
MB as intent on being yotzei kol hashittos - that is probably inaccurate,
but it certainly does not seem like a methodology of psak. The MB is far
more, it seems, a melaket - a forerunner of the type of sefer so popular
today (a type I happen to like!) - not a psak-oriented work.

> Hashem is clear to a posek it carries a mandate to reach absolute
> conclusions, i.e.if you think you need 600,000 for reshut harabim, ignore
> the other opinions. Hachra'ah is choosing what you think is the best
> answer.  The problem is what if a posek has no opinion as to which is right
> or wrong,he is unsure whether the ratzon hashem is to require 600,000 for a
> reshus harabbim?  Obviuously you cannot define ratzon Hashem if you are in
> doubt!  The solution: ba'al nefesh machmir, avoid choosing an option; try
> to cover every base.

But, then, should such a person be called a posek?

YGB

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

That is exactly what I would say - were she not karka olam, she might well
be shogeg!

YGB

On Fri, 21 Aug 1998 cbrown@bestware.com wrote:

> 
> The na'arah is pturah, but did she engage in an act of arayot?  What about
> "Karka olam"?
> 
> (  I'm not saying I disagree, I'm just saying I don't think its that
> simple.  The fact that we use different terminology, "mitasek" vs. "ones"
> sort of led me down this train of thought.)
> 

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

YGB:>>>The MB is far more, it seems, a melaket - a forerunner of the type
of sefer so popular today (a type I happen to like!) - not a psak-oriented
work.<<<

So doesn't that resolve your question, i.e. how does idea of being choshesh
for other definitions for reshut harabim jive with psak=ratzon hashem.  M"B
(and others who are choshesh for everything)was not aiming for psak, he was
melaket and is choshesh for everything - that was my point!  BTW, my
personal preference is the opposite, I prefer real psak.  I know how to do
research also.  If I ask a sheila from a Rav it means I want something
beyond a list of sources I could put together if I had the time - I want a
definition fo ratzon Hashem.  (and that doesn't mean an arbitary choice or
the stack-of-books for this position is taller then the stack of books for
the other opinion.  Do you say Rov on a likkut of printed seforim?)

YGB:>>>That is exactly what I would say - were she not karka olam, she
might well be shogeg!<<<

Should I bother to respond or is it obvious what I think?  In any event,
you agree with my dechiya and the question still stands: What's the
difference bet. mitasek and ones????

-CB  (#5 for the day - a new record!)

Hi All,

We have a lot of new memebers and I'd just like to remind us all to
refrain from using specific prefixes and suffixes in conjunction with
peoples names.  In order to avoid major heated arguments, we have agreed
that when mentioning the names of different rabbis, the terms Hagaon,
shlitah, etc. are to be understood and should not be specifically
written by the poster. 

Shalom al yisroel.

Take care and have a good shabbos,

Joel


-- 

Joel
Margolies                                                                           
margol@ms.com	
W-212-762-2386

This forum recently discussed matters of a sexual nature. Some
participated in that discussion, while others objected to discussing such
issues publicly. In this posting, I hope to explain (a) why I disagree
with that view, and (b) how I hope to resolve the two views.

The Torah teaches us that there is a right way and a wrong way to pray, a
right way and wrong way to eat, even a right way and wrong way to tie
one's shoes. It should not surprise us to know that the Torah also
teaches that there is a right way and wrong way for spouses to be
intimate with each other.

But as far as I can tell, this Torah remains hidden somewhere. I have
searched, and am continuing to search, but I cannot find any people or
seforim who are willing and able to teach these things. When I was
engaged, my yeshiva had Hilchos Niddah classes for the chasanim, but none
of the three rebbeim who taught it were willing or able to answer my
questions. Details available on request.

Other people refer to those classes as "Taharas Mishpacha" classes, but I
refuse to. Those classes teach how the mishpacha becomes tamay, how to
act when the mishpacha is tamay, how the mishpacha gets rid of that
tumah, and expecting the next occurence of this tumah. That's not Taharas
Hamishpacha, it's TUMAS Hamishpacha. When someone teaches how to act when
the mishpacha is tahor, that's when I'll call it Taharas Hamishpacha.

In times of famine, one eats whatever is available, with little regard to
its quality. In a severe famine, one will eat food of questionable
kashrus, or even food which is potentially poisonous. I strongly believe
that this generation is getting so little Torah on this subject, that we
need to find some way to increase the dosage.

I do understand the delicateness of these issues, and the need for
personal interaction and guidance. But it is also clear to me that the
ban on public discussions is not a total one, for if it were, then we
would not find them being discussed so graphically in Orach Chaim 240,
Even Haezer 23, and elsewhere.

They are discussed graphically indeed, but with little explanation. In
this regard, I find these topics to be not very different than any other
area. The Shulchan Aruch is a compendium of laws, not a textbook. To
understand the basic concepts of any area in Torah, one should most
ideally go to a teacher. This is what Torah Sheb'al Peh is all about. But
in recent centuries, this burden has been shifting from the teachers to
the seforim. "Sefer Chafetz Chayim" is a great and classic example; by
quoting and explaining the many mitzvos d'oraisa which one can violate by
speaking Lashon Hara, the Chafetz Chaim teaches us the many basic
concepts, which the halacha section then clarifies in more detail.

Our generation has been blessed with a multitude of such seforim, in both
Hebrew and English, on topics as varied as Ribis, Tefila, Muktza, and
many others, which take the student by the hand and teach him the ideas,
concepts, and halachos, both in their basic form, and (just as
importantly) how they relate to modern situations. I have not found
anything even remotely similar for the halachos of intimacy.

THE SUGGESTION IS THIS: 

I had thought that this mailing list might be an appropriate place for me
to ask some of the questions which have been troubling me. This forum is
intended for a knowledgable group of people, and I had thought that this
would make it sufficiently non-public.

Others disagree, and someone suggested to me that we create a spinoff
list,  specifically for Torah discussions of a sexual nature. We will try
to keep it small and private. One problem I can see is in trying to
decide how much explicitness is acceptable, and where to draw the line.
Perhaps that can be one of the first topics for discussion.

A larger problem will be in finding knowledgable people who are willing
to share that knowledge. It will be very sad if we have a large number of
people with experiences similar to mine, and no one who can teach us
anything.

SO: If the ideas above appeal to you, please write back to me. Initially,
I will simply collect everone's names and comments, and then we will go
into publication, either as a regular mailing list, or as a list of
addresses emailing to each other. Please write back to me and tell me
your ideas.

Akiva Miller
KennethGMiller@juno.com



_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

Kenneth G Miller wrote:

> But as far as I can tell, this Torah remains hidden somewhere. I have
> searched, and am continuing to search, but I cannot find any people or
> seforim who are willing and able to teach these things. When I was
> engaged, my yeshiva had Hilchos Niddah classes for the chasanim, but none
> of the three rebbeim who taught it were willing or able to answer my
> questions. Details available on request.
>

As a psychotherapist in the charedi world, I find the idea of a discussion
group on marital relations very questionable from the halachic viewpoint and
likely doomed to failure as a source of meaningful and correct information. I
am rather surprised that you have not been able to find sensitive,
knowledgeable rabbanim - they do exist!. If you let me know what area you
live in, I will try to locate appropriate rabbanim. On the psychological
level - the Men are from Mars series - has excellent suggestions and much  -
though not all - of what he says is acceptable from the halachic viewpoint
(again check with a competent Rav). As far as seforim - an excellent source
book is Mishkan Yisroel which discusses many fundamental issues.It of course
is not a substitute for a posek. It has haskamos from Rav Eliyahiv, Rav
Wosner, Rav Chaim Pinchas Sheinberg, Rav Wolbe etc. It deals specifically
with understanding Simon #240.

                                        Daniel Eidensohn

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


[ Distributed to the Avodah mailing list, digested version.           ]
[ To post: mail to avodah@aishdas.org                                 ]
[ For control requests: mail the word "help" to majordomo@aishdas.org ]