Avodah Mailing List

Volume 02 : Number 149

Wednesday, February 3 1999

• Re: kol haomer david chatah
• Thought on Yisro - The Questions:
• Spinoza
• Ignored Mitzvos
• Jewish Center
• Re: Avodah V2 #141
• Re: Jewish Center
• Re: Jewish Center
• Re: Avodah V2 #144
• Re: Avodah V2 #148
• Question about Rav Klein
• Rav Klein
• Re: Question about Rav Klein
• Modern Orthodoxy
• Rav and tefillah b'tzibbur, eiruv tavshilin
• Learning and Tefillah
• Re: Modern Orthodoxy
• Davening beyechidus
• Re: Rav and tefillah b'tzibbur, eiruv tavshilin
• Re: Spinoza
• Revised Jewish Center Post
• The Rav and Minyan
• How Chazal knew it was eruv tavshilin
• [none]
• [none]
• RAV -14: Catharsis of the Intellect

On Mon, 1 Feb 1999 Joelirich@aol.com wrote:

> Dear list,
> Daf yomi learners recently encountered a gemora(yuma 22b) which discusses the
> sins of david hamelech without quoting the opinion of R' shmuel ben nachmani
> from shabbat 54a of eno ela toeh.  When I looked back at shabbat it occured to
> me that one could certainly argue that R' shmuel's opinion was not the
> maskana.  Has anyone seen anything on this since from an earlier thread the
> theme of perfection of the avot seems to have taken very firm root.
> 
> Kol Tuv
> Joel RIch
> 
I was under the impression that R' Shmuel just tells us that Dovid waasn't
over the issur of eises ish (b/c of the get which was written before uriah
went to war), but it's clear that dovid had other sins and this gemara
indicates he was punished for the massa of Batsheva, but this doesn't
contadict the statement that Dovid wasn't over aishes ish. (much like
Reuven with bilha or chofni and pinchas---they didn't actually do adultery
but were punished for what they did do) This is how I understand Dovid's
case as well. 
Elie Ginsparg

Questions:
What 3 mitzvos (almost) immediately follow the Asseres haDibros? 
What's their connection with the Asseres haDibros?
What's their connection with each other?

Rich Wolpoe 

>>Excommunicating Spinoza probably gave him
more promotion than he could have gotten on his own. It is well known 
that as soon as a book is banned its readership jumps.<<

At least one professor of mine (I believe Dr. Hyman Grinstein) claimed that 
Spinoza was banned under pressure from Christian clergy and that contemporary 
rabbonim preferred to ignore him...  

Regards,
Rich Wolpoe

  

Eli Clark writes: >>Contrary to popular belief, Jews have consistently
disregarded various halakhot since the time of the Mishanh (at least).<<

A late rebbe at Ner Yisroel high school called these "meis mitzvos".  Mitzvos 
fallen into widespread (not necesarilly total) neglect.  He said Shaatnez had 
been a meis mitzvo before the Shaatnez lab, and loshon horo was before the 
Chofetz Chayim published his sefer... 

I think Chodosh was neglected for long periods, too.

Regards,
Rich Wolpoe

I noticed that my comment about The Jewish Center has set off a flurry of
controversy. While, I still would never daven there, and I would bet the house
that the Mechitza is not 5.5 feet high, (at least not in most places) and I
think that the gabbai there is a complete Mamzer, I want to take back my
statement (calling it the "so called" Jewish Center). I do this, b/c the point
of my post had nothing to do with the shul itself. My point was, that I
happened to see a complete Apikores daven there, and mistakingly assumed he
was a member there. My post was listed in an effort to get a response to Irv's
latest comments about Hashem breaking the Bris with Klal Yisrael, and the
notion that Hashem must beg for our forgiveness. On that note, I apologize if
I insulted anyone with my slight about the Jewish Center, I did not mean to
insult anyone, Not a single time, Never. I never asked anyone to
lie.....Whoops.....

Thank You

Daniel Lefton
New York City, NY

> ------------------------------
> 
> Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 11:21:56 -0600 (CST)
> From: "Shoshanah M. & Yosef G. Bechhofer" <sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>
> Subject: Apology
> 
> I apologize for using such strong language, readily subject to
> misinterpretation, as I did in my response to R' Beilin, in our public
> forum.
> 
> I had thought that R' Beilin's message to me, by its tone, was a private
> one. I responded in a manner fitting for private correspondence, not for
> public consumption.

===> I have a simple question for r. Beilin.
Is R. Klein involved in Heter Me'ah rabbanan where the woman is not
allowed access to her Get?  That is a simple yes-no matter. In his rather
emotional response to RGB, I did NOT clearly pick up a denial of that
matter.  Similarly, was R. Klein involved in the horrible "Kiddushei
Ketana" issue?  another simple yes-no question.
If R. Beilin is unable/unwilling to respond, I assume that everyone on the
list can draw their own conclusions.
[Note: a call to "provide proof" is NOT a denial.   similarly, a statement
that "you do not know the circumstances" is not a denial.  I want to be
clear so that there is no confusion.  I am simply asking for a clear
statement on the part of R. Belin that R. Klein is NOT involved in those
activities.]
--Zvi

I have stayed out of this ugly name calling until now because I see no benefit
from it, and much harm that can and is resulting.
But enough is enough. I kindly request that our esteemed moderator speak up and
act.
It is enough of Dr. Lefton's stuff.
Here again he is calling people "complete Apikores" and "complete Mamzer".
Remove him from the list. Silence him.
I (and I am sure everyone else on this list) do not want to read any more of his
postings.

Ari




LIPPYESQ@aol.com wrote:

> I noticed that my comment about The Jewish Center has set off a flurry of
> controversy. While, I still would never daven there, and I would bet the house
> that the Mechitza is not 5.5 feet high, (at least not in most places) and I
> think that the gabbai there is a complete Mamzer, I want to take back my
> statement (calling it the "so called" Jewish Center). I do this, b/c the point
> of my post had nothing to do with the shul itself. My point was, that I
> happened to see a complete Apikores daven there, and mistakingly assumed he
> was a member there. My post was listed in an effort to get a response to Irv's
> latest comments about Hashem breaking the Bris with Klal Yisrael, and the
> notion that Hashem must beg for our forgiveness. On that note, I apologize if
> I insulted anyone with my slight about the Jewish Center, I did not mean to
> insult anyone, Not a single time, Never. I never asked anyone to
> lie.....Whoops.....
>
> Thank You
>
> Daniel Lefton
> New York City, NY

I just wanted to clarify, that in my calling the Gabbai of the JC a Mamzer, I
WAS NOT , repeat WAS NOT reffereing to Rabbi I. Weitzchner. I know Rabbi
Weitzsner has the title of Executive Director of the JC, and I do not want to
confuse him with another person.I have never known Rabbi Weitzshner to be mean
in any way whatsoever. I do not know the name of the degenerate who publically
embarrases people and throws them out of shul, I assume he is some sort of
gabbai, probably self appointed. I just wanted to clarify.

Thank You.

Daniel Lefton
New York City, NY

> 
> Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 11:50:22 -0500
> From: Isaiah Beilin <ibeilin@draper.com>
> Subject: Re: credit and discredit
> 
> A
> >
> >If there is a constant and unremitting sh'mu'a about someone, one has to
> >suspect that there is something there.  The g'mara in Kiddushin discusses
> >l'shon hara and being suspicious.
> >
> 
> SO DON'T GO TO HIM. BUT, DON'T SPREAD IT. THAT IS ANOTHER 
> INYAN.  WHY DOES THIS HAVE TO DISCUSSED BY THE GROUP.
> IS THIS NOGEAH TO ANYONE?

===> So that others will be aware that maybe they should not go to him,
either.

--Zvi

I had written:
> Eli Clark wrote:
> >           as an Orthodox shul.  Kaplan had been educated at YU, but had
> 
> No, JTS. ...
> R' Kaplan went in about 1906 to his father's friend R' Jacob Reines
> for smicha.  Kaplan graduated JTS in 1902, and became the *senior*

On further reflection (the book is at my parents'), I think Kaplan 
did go to Etz Chaim for elementary or junior high school, but from
the age of 13 to 21, he was at JTS.

As for the other comments on average level of observance, granted.
Even my Orthodox relatives from that family will generally eat 
fish out, and do not buy "kosher cheese" exclusively.  It's what
Jenna Weissman Joselit might call "Americanized Orthodox".  See
her "New York's Jewish Jews: American Orthodoxy in the Interwar
Years".

  I have no intention of responding. It is just plain insulting to all.
  This is not the way to start the issue
  again. It is not the business of this group to investigate and solve these
  kinds of problems. If this is true let the bate dinim do it. They got 
  involved with R. Rackman and if they feel there is a problem then 
  they will officially speak up.

  Let us face it. If a man gets a heter meah rabonim improperly he is a
  bigamist who is "over an issur". Now you are choshed a godol batorah
  for causing a man to sin. Shame on this group. This is not the way benei 
  torah should behave. 



At 04:16 PM 2/2/99 -0500, you wrote:
>> ------------------------------
>> 
>> Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 11:21:56 -0600 (CST)
>> From: "Shoshanah M. & Yosef G. Bechhofer" <sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>
>> Subject: Apology
>> 
>> I apologize for using such strong language, readily subject to
>> misinterpretation, as I did in my response to R' Beilin, in our public
>> forum.
>> 
>> I had thought that R' Beilin's message to me, by its tone, was a private
>> one. I responded in a manner fitting for private correspondence, not for
>> public consumption.
>
>===> I have a simple question for r. Beilin.
>Is R. Klein involved in Heter Me'ah rabbanan where the woman is not
>allowed access to her Get?  That is a simple yes-no matter. In his rather
>emotional response to RGB, I did NOT clearly pick up a denial of that
>matter.  Similarly, was R. Klein involved in the horrible "Kiddushei
>Ketana" issue?  another simple yes-no question.
>If R. Beilin is unable/unwilling to respond, I assume that everyone on the
>list can draw their own conclusions.
>[Note: a call to "provide proof" is NOT a denial.   similarly, a statement
>that "you do not know the circumstances" is not a denial.  I want to be
>clear so that there is no confusion.  I am simply asking for a clear
>statement on the part of R. Belin that R. Klein is NOT involved in those
>activities.]
>--Zvi
> 

  I am not going to save the world. Do what ever you want. Say what ever
  you want. my silence should not be construed as anything. It is none of
  my business. I have been yotzeh the mitzvah of tochocho. Now it is up
  to you all.

  From now on I will not respond. Nothing will smoke me out into a debate.

Oh, I get it.  In a Jewish witch hunt you are guilty until proven innocent.
Rabbi Beilin defends R. Klein's good name and now R. Klein is guilty
of some rumor until R. Beilin can prove him otherwise.

I hope I missing something.

LET'S JUST CUT IT OUT.

Yes, I am screaming.

Ari



> >===> I have a simple question for r. Beilin.
> >Is R. Klein involved in Heter Me'ah rabbanan where the woman is not
> >allowed access to her Get?  That is a simple yes-no matter. In his rather
> >emotional response to RGB, I did NOT clearly pick up a denial of that
> >matter.  Similarly, was R. Klein involved in the horrible "Kiddushei
> >Ketana" issue?  another simple yes-no question.
> >If R. Beilin is unable/unwilling to respond, I assume that everyone on the
> >list can draw their own conclusions.
> >[Note: a call to "provide proof" is NOT a denial.   similarly, a statement
> >that "you do not know the circumstances" is not a denial.  I want to be
> >clear so that there is no confusion.  I am simply asking for a clear
> >statement on the part of R. Belin that R. Klein is NOT involved in those
> >activities.]
> >--Zvi
> >

I have been following the discussion of modern ortjhodoxy with great
interest, since i attribute the lack of spirituality and blurring of
distinctions that I encountered in my five years in the YU system as the the
primary reason for my having left Jewish observance.  By blurring of
distinctions. itis my judgement that the Torah U'mada that I encountered
seemed to raise the Mada to a level of kedusha only reserved for Torah, and
brought the Torah down to just another subject.  I did have one teacher who
I suppose was trying to make a statement - Rabbi Dr. X who I had for both
Gemorah and English.  In the morning he insisted on being called Rabbi X,
while in the afternoon it could only be Dr. X.  Hardly a model of synthesis.

But I digress.  Most of the discussion has centered of practice - hair
covering, mixed swimming etc..  While these are good indicators, everyone
agrees that in reagrd to practice, the enteire Jewidh world has moved to the
right.  What concerns me more than prctice however is values.  While there
may be much to gain form the knowledge of found in the secular world, its
values often stand in direct oppositionto what we hold most dear.  And while
many of those values have crept into the right wing as well, this firting
with modern culture ultimatelt creeps inot our value syetem corrupting ou
children our families and our communities.  Although many are aable to stam

>>>Does anyone know the mekor which allows one to miss tefilla betzibur as
well as krias hatorah (it was shabbos afternoon) in order to continue
learning. Couldn't the Rav continue learning while he walked--to mull over
a svara or something. This also implies that one should continue learning
during chazaras hashatz if he was involved in a sugya--doesn't it. This I
know comes under sharp criticism even from the biggest litvaks. It would
also seem from the story that the Rav interrupted his indepth learning to
daven and go right back to learning--This also presents a halachic problem
of davening while something is on ones mind. I'm curious to clarify these
points.
Elie Ginsparg<<<

Never heard this story, so I'll just comment on the halachic issues
irrespective of the Rav's involvement.  Tefillah b'tzibur may not be a chiyuv
even miderabbanan - just a hanhaga tova.  That is pashut pshat in the Rambam
(8:1); I believe one of the other mekoros is the MaHaRiL (? - not sure I got
the source right) who says making a minyan is an insufficient reason to make
an eiruv techumin.  With regard to keriyas haTorah: certainly if you hold it
is a chovas hatzibbur (see Ramban in Milchamos at the beginning of Megillah)
this is no problem.  Finally, it was reported on this list a number of months
ago in the name of the Chicago Soloveitchik;s that tefillah b'tzibbur is a
chovas hatzibur - as long as 10 people are listening you can do as you wish.
As for the story itself: I seem to recall hearing that the Rav would gather a
minyan for keriyas hatorah when he missed it because of the commute from
Boston, leading me to suspect that he held it was a chovas hayachid - since
this is second hand I can't resolve the anecdotal discrepancies, but it is
more important to see the Ramban in Milchamos inside anyway if you are
interested in the issue.  As for interrupting one's immersion in a sugya to
daven - for a gadol like the Rav I imagine there would be no other way to
daven, would there ?

On a side note, I believe (and I didn't double check) that the GR"A said A"T
was mistakingly read as eiruv tavshilin - it should be Eiruv Techumin,
stressing that Avraham kept even mitzvot whose d'orayta status was
questionable.

-Chaim

In reference to the missing tefillah betzibbur for learning, it is said of
my great grandfather, The Modzitzer Rebbe ZT'L, that he used to stand by a
shtender and learn B'Kol Ram all night until he was so exhausted that he
was out of strength, normally very close to morning.  He would then fall
asleep until late in the morning, after all of the minyanim and daven by
himself.  According to most versions, this was even after the zman tefillah.  
Shaul Weinreb

Frenkel, Garry J. wrote:
> 
> I have been following the discussion of modern ortjhodoxy with great
> interest, since i attribute the lack of spirituality and blurring of
> distinctions that I encountered in my five years in the YU system as the the
> primary reason for my having left Jewish observance.  By blurring of
> distinctions. itis my judgement that the Torah U'mada that I encountered
> seemed to raise the Mada to a level of kedusha only reserved for Torah, and
> brought the Torah down to just another subject. 

I'm sorry, I don't accept that your experience at YU is what took you 
away from obsevant Judaism. It is a disingenuous statement, meant on 
your part to bash YU because of some negative experience you personally 
may have had, which has nothing to do with your claim that Torah U'mada 
blurs the distinctions between Torah and Mada. I further believe that 
you chose to leave the path of Torah for the sake of your own personal 
desire not to the have the yoke of Heaven upon you.  If you are so 
intersted in the Kedushas HaTorah, then why did you not leave YU to go 
to a yeshiva that does not have Mada in it's philosophy, like Lakewood? 
No, you just decided to leave Judaism and blame YU (as a sort of revenge 
I suspect).  That leaves you with absolutely no dignity. But, you can 
repent and regain some of that dignity by asking Mechila from the 
instition you accuse of "forcing" you into your present lifestyle.

HM

Just to add to my previous post about the Modzitzer Rebbe ZT'L, I forgot to
mention the well known custom of many Chassidic Rebbe's to daven in a small
room adjacent to, but seperate from the tzibbur.  The Rebbe of Boyan, for
example, but there are others whose identity currently evades my memory.  I
can't let this go without saying that other Admorim critcized this
practice,as being porush from the tzibbur.  Make note of the famous story
of the Baal Shem Tov who compared the tzibbur with him in the same room to
a ladder of tefillos that made him able to ascend to shamayim.  Without the
tefillos of the tzibbur together with him, his own tefillos wouldn';t reach
as high.  Shaul Weinreb

In a message dated 2/2/99 7:32:29 PM Eastern Standard Time, C1A1Brown@aol.com
writes:

<< 
 On a side note, I believe (and I didn't double check) that the GR"A said A"T
 was mistakingly read as eiruv tavshilin - it should be Eiruv Techumin,
 stressing that Avraham kept even mitzvot whose d'orayta status was
 questionable.
 
 -Chaim
  >>
Dear Chaim,
     The gra does say the roshei tevot were misread. R' Sacks(YU and Passaic)
also pointed out the meshech chachma in vayishlach on vayechan says that eruv
tavshilin was symbolic of avraham's outreach approach(since the concept is
based on hoeel that orchim might come) versus yaakov who was always insulating
klal yisrael (eruv techumin)

kol tuv,
Joel Rich

richard_wolpoe@ibi.com wrote:
> 
> >>Excommunicating Spinoza probably gave him
> more promotion than he could have gotten on his own. It is well known
> that as soon as a book is banned its readership jumps.<<
> 
> At least one professor of mine (I believe Dr. Hyman Grinstein) claimed that
> Spinoza was banned under pressure from Christian clergy and that contemporary
> rabbonim preferred to ignore him...
> 
> Regards,
> Rich Wolpoe
> 
> Correct, I recall Dr. Grinstein espausing such a position.
sk

I noticed that my comment about The Jewish Center has set off a flurry of
controversy. While, I still would never daven there, and I would bet the house
that the Mechitza is not 5.5 feet high, (at least not in most places) and I
think that the gabbai ( Not Rabbi I. Weitshner) there is a completly wrong to
publically emabarass people , I want to take back my statement (calling it the
"so called" Jewish Center). I do this, b/c the point of my post had nothing to
do with the shul itself. My point was, that I happened to see a complete
Apikores daven there, and mistakingly assumed he was a member there. My post
was listed in an effort to get a response to Irv's latest comments about
Hashem breaking the Bris with Klal Yisrael, and the notion that Hashem must
beg for our forgiveness. On that note, I apologize if I insulted anyone with
my slight about the Jewish Center, I did not mean to insult anyone, Not a
single time, Never. I never asked anyone to lie.....Whoops.....

Thank You

Daniel Lefton
New York City, NY

Shalom Carmy writes: 
R. Lichtenstein has said (and it's written in last issue of Shana
b'Shana) that as he got older the Rav was more inclined to seek out a
minyan. Even in his old age, however, he often davened minha in the
apartment when I was with him, in order not to interrupt our work.

We interviewed Rav Lichtenstein on this matter. See: Aryeh A. Frimer and
Dov I. Frimer, Tradition, 32:2, pp. 5-118 (Spring 1998). In note 244 we
write:
"...a number of posekim maintain that greater kavvana supersedes tefilla
be-tsibbur. R. Lichtenstein indicates that until approximately the time
when the Rav's wife, Tonya, fell ill (ca. 1963), the Rav was of the
opinion that other spiritual considerations (e.g., the study of Torah, 
enhanced personal kavvana) could be of greater importance than
participating in communal prayer. Later, however, the Rav modified his
position. Although he continued to maintain that communal prayer was not
in and of itself a halakhic requirement, he now attributed much more
significance to tefilla be-tsibbur than he had hitherto. As a result,
the Rav believed that one should not sacrifice tefilla be-tsibbur merely
for increased kavvana; one should rather strive to attain the highest
level of kavvana which he can within the communal prayer setting..."

> We were bothered in yesterday's DY as to why Chazal chose "Eruv > Tavshilin" out of thin air to express that A"A kept even d'rabbanan's. > This morning, via the Or HaYashar, then via the CS YD 73, I discovered > that the Ba'alei Tos. hold that "Eruvei Tavshilin" here means not 
> mixing dishes - not serving the milk and meat together to the visitors!
> 
> Any other pshatim?
> 
> YGB
> 

Finally! something for which I joined the list; something to make me get
out of my chair and look up a source.

I originally looked in the Torah Temimah, where he quotes another source
that reads aruv techumim which fits in better with the girsa that
Avraham kept divrei Torah and airuv tavshilin is only a drababnan. 
(though the Torah Temimah chooses to say the drasha should read divirei
sofrim and therefore eruv tavshilin is more correct) 

Then I went to the Torah Sheleima where there is a long foot note on
this drasha.  He quotes a Radak who says (Ber. 28:6) since the pasuk
says "mishmarti" and eruv tavshilin is a mishmeres for work on yom tov
so too Avraham did things to protect the mitzvos.  Then the Torah
Shleima quotes the Sefer Hamashbir (under the section Erev) that the
gemamra in Beya 15b learns a remez to eruv tavshilin from Shemos 15:23
where it says that klal yisroel should leave over food "lmishmeres".
Hence as the Radak says "mishmeres" is indicative of eruv tavshilin.  

See the Torah Sheleima for other explanations.

Subject; David and Saul

In regard to previous discussions of biblical personalities I saw the
following comment in the Internet Dafyomi column of Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld

>> The VILNA GA'ON (Kol Eliyahu #203) writes that the difference between
>> David and Sha'ul did, in some way, depend on their Mazal. The two kings were
>> equal in their Ma'asim Tovim. However, Sha'ul was born with a natural
>> tendency to be humble and with an inborn propensity for doing Ma'asim Tovim.
>> David, on the other hand, was born with a tendency to be prideful and with
>> an attraction towards warfare, and he did not have the same inclination to
>> do Ma'asim Tovim as Sha'ul had. (He was an "Admoni.") Therefore, even though
>> they were equal in the amount of Ma'asim Tovim which they  did, David had to
>> struggle much harder to reach that level.
>> 
>> Since David overcame his natural tendencies, Hashem rewarded him measure for
>> measure and Hashem's mercy overcame His will to deal justice to David
>> ha'Melech for his sins. He dealt with David with "Erech Apayim," and
>> accepted David's Teshuvah.

Eli Turkel

Subject; David and Saul

In regard to previous discussions of biblical personalities I saw the
following comment in the Internet Dafyomi column of Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld

>> The VILNA GA'ON (Kol Eliyahu #203) writes that the difference between
>> David and Sha'ul did, in some way, depend on their Mazal. The two kings were
>> equal in their Ma'asim Tovim. However, Sha'ul was born with a natural
>> tendency to be humble and with an inborn propensity for doing Ma'asim Tovim.
>> David, on the other hand, was born with a tendency to be prideful and with
>> an attraction towards warfare, and he did not have the same inclination to
>> do Ma'asim Tovim as Sha'ul had. (He was an "Admoni.") Therefore, even though
>> they were equal in the amount of Ma'asim Tovim which they  did, David had to
>> struggle much harder to reach that level.
>> 
>> Since David overcame his natural tendencies, Hashem rewarded him measure for
>> measure and Hashem's mercy overcame His will to deal justice to David
>> ha'Melech for his sins. He dealt with David with "Erech Apayim," and
>> accepted David's Teshuvah.

Eli Turkel

Dear list.
I cut out one critical paragraph.

Regards,
Rich Wolpoe

______________________________ Forward Header __________________________________
Subject: RAV -14: Catharsis of the Intellect 
Author:  Yeshivat Har Etzion's Israel Koschitzky Virtual Beit Midrash 
<yhe@vbm-torah.org> at Tcpgate
Date:    2/3/99 6:08 AM


                    YESHIVAT HAR ETZION
       ISRAEL KOSCHITZKY VIRTUAL BEIT MIDRASH (VBM)
**********************************************************

    INTRODUCTION TO THE PHILOSOPHY OF RAV SOLOVEITCHIK

                   by Rav Ronnie Ziegler


          LECTURE #14: Catharsis of the Intellect
              and of the Religious Experience

...

      Dialectic, complexity, plurality of demands -  these
are  the fundamental difficulties in studying and teaching 
the  Rav;  but  they are also his greatness.   People  are 
often  looking  for simple, monochromatic answers  to  the 
great questions of life.  In his unflinching honesty,  the 
Rav  cannot  provide these, for he does not  believe  they 
exist.   In his eyes, man contains conflicting tendencies, 
God  sets  forth multiple demands, and the world  must  be 
perceived under differing aspects.

      The complexity of Rav Soloveitchik's views leads  to
differing  emphases in his various writings and addresses. ...

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


[ 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 ]