Avodah Mailing List

Volume 03 : Number 106

Wednesday, June 30 1999

• Re: AMiller's "What is a 'Rabbi'?" post
• Re: What is a "Rabbi"?
• Re: Mamzerus
• Chazal, science, esoteric wisdom
• Re: Avodah V3 #104
• mamzerim
• semichah
• Secular studies; R. Lichtenstein and the Humanities
• Chareidi Schools
• Re: Chareidi Schools
• re: semichah
• re: Chareidi Schools
• Re: semichah
• Jewish Sacramento Arson Update (fwd)
• Re: Avodah V3 #105: Sheep & anesthesiology consent on shabbos
• Re: semichah
• Mamzer
• agudath Israel
• Re: Avodah V3 #105: Sheep & anesthesiology consent on shabbos

Michael Poppers wrote: <<< I see a tremendous difference between asking
one's posaik for a p'sak and reading p'sak from a saifer ... the
discussion re MB is moot to me unless the reader considered Rav Kagan
z'tz'l' his posaik (which I'm not sure would even be possible unless the
posaik and the reader were both alive at some point: can you choose a
posaik posthumously?).>>>

This is a good point, but *my* point is that even if one *can* choose a
posaik posthumously, the Mishna Brurah may be in a different class, due
to his lack of semicha. Even if one *could* choose the Rambam, or Rav
Yosef Karo, or Rav Moshe Feinstein, as their posek, perhaps the same does
not apply to the Chofetz Chaim ztz"l.

Akiva Miller
___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.

Mark Feldman wrote <<< According to the first interpretation, there would
be no prohibition for a person to pasken if he has no rebbe or his rebbe
has passed away. >>>

This is why I based my question upon the idea that if a person has
already gotten a p'sak, then he is not allowed to "shop around" and ask
someone else. It is intuitively obvious to me (read: "I might be wrong,
but please show how") that if one asks a shaila to a layman, he IS
allowed - encouraged, even! - to ask a real posek later on. If so, then
there must be some kind of "chalos" which kicks in to make the
prohibition (of re-asking) apply. To me, this proves the halacha does
have some kind of mechanism for distinguishing a posek from a layman.

Akiva Miller
___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.

Someone asked <<< Anybody have a suggestion how to make the concept of
mamzer palatable? >>>

Michael Poppers responded <<< Sounds like you would have to first "make
palatable" concepts like the Torah and its Author >>>

Okay, let me rephrase the question: Does anyone have a suggestion how to
reconcile the idea that "a person and all his descendants are consigned
to a lower social class and marriage group, merely because of a sin, or
even an error, done by one distant set of ancestors" with the idea that
"D'racheha darchei noam".

Akiva Miller
___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.

I previously wrote: <..The plain sense of R. Shrira is compelling to
me,though clearly not to everybody (e.g. RYZB reference to R. Tam, another
great non scientist BTW whose views on such matters needn't - from my and r.
Shrira's perspective - be taken seriously). So RRW suggestion that we "give
Chazal the benefit of the doubt" seems  misplaced to me<<

To which RRW responded with:
<Question: Do you accept or reject that Tannoim such as R. Akivo and RSBY
had 
aceess to estoreric wisdom?

Question: When Elisha sent Naaman to the Yarden to cure his tzoraas was this
a 
neis nigleh?  If it was a Nise nigleh, how is it that the pousk makes no
mention
of a Dvar Hashem prior? IOW how did this work?

Clarification: if you re-read my quote, I said it was MISTAKEN to doubt
Chazal's
capabilities, and it was FOOLISH to always take them literally.>

1. of course one must accept the sudy of esoteric wisdom on the part of
these two named chazal, since tradition so records it, RSBY at least in his
caveman days while RA the only member of his qabboloh class to nichnos
bisholom vyotzeh bisholom.  That said it seems like a non-sequitor to my
assertion that there is not the slightest reason to credit chazal with
modern scientific insight.  i would not presume to equate esoteric wisdom
with the latter nor would i suggest that some of my former extremely
distinguished but alas, card carrying goy, professors, had attained
"esoteric wisdom", or even that I myself had done so, just through a
different route than RSBY and RA. 
2. As for elisha and naaman i would also not presume to answer your question
about "how does it work?".  ain lonu eiseq binistoros and i can't claim much
expertise in that area. As for requiring hashem to announce things
beforehand for a nigleh, beats me. i tend to be suspicious of generalized
'rules" which then turn out to be riddled with exceptions each of which
requires an ad hoc explanation. Though i'm not clar on why this should make
a difference to anything one way or the other.
3.  Guess i was reading a bit more into your original formulation
<..literally true is indeed a fool. Anyone who doubts Chazal's capability to
have an advanced insight into science is - well let's say mistaken.>  and
darshening the "let's say" where you hadn't intended to go.  Sorry not to
catch your nuance properly.

Mechy Frankel				W: (703) 325-1277
michael.frankel@dtra.mil		H: (301) 593-3949

> Subject: Boarding Schools
> 
> Dear Rich,
> Is it your contention that the parents' primary role in transmitting torah is 
> to find someone else to take that responsibility from them on a 24 hour a day 
> basis(unless they would flounder) at the age when the child is just beginning 
> to reach intellectual maturity? Why not start earlier with boarding school 
> for tots - wouldn't this show even a greater dedication and mesirut nefesh by 
> the parents?(apologies for my sarcasm - I just wonder whether the parents 
> role in all this today is consistent with what it is supposed to be)  
> 
> Kol Tuv
> Joel Rich<<
> 
I heard an interesting shiur on this recently.
If one looks at the gemara it is clear that originally everyone
taught their own children.
Later the rabbis realized that those without parents didn't get
an education. So that set up a central school in Jerusalem for
these orphans (only others continued at home).

Only much later did R. Yeshua ben Gamla set up schools in eavery
local district and even then mainly for older children.

Thus, it is clear that chazal felt it very important for children
to be brought up by their parents and not in a borading school
even for teenagers. Going away for learning was reserved for
adults not children! i.e. a major part of the education is seeing
how the parents behave and following their customs and not just
book learning (i.e. article of Chaim Soloveitchik).

Kol Tuv, 
Eli Turkel

> > 
> > <<When you point out that "mamzer is a condition, like, for example
> > thalidomide children.  It doesn't go away." I think that this statement
> > cannot be accepted easily by anybody (apart from the strictest
> > Haredim).
> > I have always thought that one of the most wonderful concepts developed
> > by Judaism is that the man is free to choose good and evil, and is
> > personally  responsible to HaShem for his choices and acts. This
> > made-in-Israel idea, that is now so familiar even in Gentile
> > cultures,
> > was a revolution for mankind. The ancient Greeks, for instance, followed
> > a different path: according to them, nobody -even if righteous- could
> > escape his destiny, unless the Gods decided to change it. Greek
> > tragedies are plenty of examples of decent people (Antigone, Edipus)
> > led to destruction by the Gods because of the sins of their ancestors. I
> > think that many Oriental civilizations shared the same philosophy,
> > although in other forms.
> > 
> > The condition of "mamzer" you describe reminds to me the organization of
> > the Hindu society, where the  "untouchable" has no hope to progress.
> > He cannot marry women belonging to "higher" social classes, cannot enjoy
> > the same civil rights et.c. It is remarkable that modern India, after
> > its independence, decided immediately to wipe out these religious
> > constraints in spite of a widespread concern for the defense of
> > national traditions.
> > 
Two points.
First, as we all know from genetics children inherit characterstics from
their parents both good and bad. It is not fair for children to get
AIDS or Tay-sachs etc. from their parents but that is life.
Mamzerut is a spiritual sickness one gets because of ones parents.
Because it is not visual does not make it less real.
Thus, one can "blame" G-d for instituting mamzerut only in the same
sense that one can blame G-d for making hereditary diseases.

As many have pointed out "freedom of choice" in Judaism is not a
complete freedom. Everyone is born with their pluses and minuses.
To say that the children of a talmud chacham and a mafia leader are
equal because they have bechirah chofshit is misleading. Similarly
not everyone has the same IQ and so cannot accomplish the same.
Given the choice of being born a mamzer or a quadrapapalegic I would
guess that mamzer is the lesser evil.

Second. A mamzer does have hope of progress. As talmud chacham mamzer is
greater than a cohen gadol. He can marry another mamzer or a convert
and there even exist ways of removing mamzerut.

Eli Turkel

> 
> I don't have any sources in front of me (always a dangerous exercise!) but 
> it's my impression that the source for the issue of s'micha is "talmid al 
> yoreh ad she'yikabel reshut m'rabbo."  This can be understood either as (1) 
> a din based on kavod ha'rav--it detracts from the teacher's kavod if his 
> student paskens in his area or (2) a halacha dealing with a student's 
> ability to pasken (essentially, a provision for licensing of rabbis).  From 
> my recollection of studying the sugyah, the first interpretation is more 
> consonant with the context of the gemara (as I recall, a former chavruta of 
> mine who is now an important talmid chacham believed this; I will check 
> with him before publicizing his name).  According to the first 
> interpretation, there would be no prohibition for a person to pasken if he 
> has no rebbe or his rebbe has passed away.
> 
> Interestingly, there are many stories of gedolim in Europe who were largely 
> self-taught and would receive a quick s'micha from a gadol based on a very 
> short "farher" (test).  Query: why should this be considered "reshut 
> m'rabbo"--is this *his* rebbe?  It seems that this interpretation 
> translates the above phrase to mean "any rabbi who has s'micha," which is 
> similar to the s'micha ish m'pi ish (mentioned in the beginning of Pirkei 
> Avot) that was discontinued during Tannaitic times (I believe as a result 
> of the Hadrianic persecutions).  What is the basis for this?
> 
> Also, is anyone who has smicha qualified to give smicha?  As a practical 
> matter, only great talmidei chachamim give smicha (I hope!), but is there 
> any reason for this limitation (other than a practical issue--a rabbi won't 
> get a rabbinic position if he has a "no-name" smicha)?
> 
> The case of the Chofetz Chaim (as reported by Akiva Miller) is quite 
> interesting: What if a person is clearly "hi'gi'a l'hora'a" but never 
> received s'micha?  And, what if the person is a member of a small group 
> which has been ostracized by the rest of religious Jewry (chas v'shalom, 
> imagine this about Lubavitch 100 years from now), the former rebbe has died 
> and no rabbi from mainstream Orthodoxy is willing to give him s'micha.  
> Would the person be permitted to pasken for the rest of his group?
> 
Moshe is mixing up two different semichot.

1. The Rivash has a long responsa on semicha (reinstituted in his day
   in Germany to give some rabbis control over psak). Basically, he
   says what Moshe brings that semicha is permission from the rebbe
   to pasken while the rebbe is alive.

2. Modern semicha - which is basically simply a title to distinguish a
   talmud chacham from others. It has no halachik status. It is usually
   obtained only by dayanim or shul rabbis not roshei yeshivot.
   Rav Soloveitchik received semicha only when he was ready to travel to
   America. I doubt if Rav Chaim brisker has semicha.

Of course, this is all separate from the "original" semicha that disappeared
near the end of the Talmudic era.

Eli Turkel

Since a number of respondents have referred to a recent article -which I
haven't seen - by R. Aharon Lichtenstein on secular studies, I thought it
would be useful to add an additional reference to a much older essay by R.
Lichtenstein on the same subject  (unless the recent publication is in fact
just a reprint of his older article).  The earlier reference is an article
published in the Commentator, 27 April, 1961.   In the light of one poster's
framing of the issue in terms of  "what is the worth of Shakespeare" I
thought  it worthwhile as well to emphasize the uniqueness of R.
Lichtenstein's work - and perhaps the more recent publication mirrors this
as well - in that it is the only essay on the subject that I've seen that
very specifically focuses on the perceived worth of the humanities as a
course of study, rather than the sciences. (By referencing its uniqueness I
of course do not mean that nobody else agrees with him, rather that I had
not come across a similar published work with such a focus.)     As a public
service therefore I provide the following excerpts from R.Lichtenstein's
1961 article.

After a brief discussion citing the "usual culprits" justifiying secular
studies as an aid to Torah study,  a hechsher talmud torah if not talmud
torah itself -agronomy for seder ziroim etc he goes on to write:

 "While the importance of general knowledge as a direct auxiliary in the
study of Torah is great, it is perhaps even more significant in a third
capacity.  Secular studies possess immense intrinsic value insofar as they
generally help develop our spiritual personality.... Nor should we be
deterred by the illusion that we can find all we need within our own
tradition. As Arnold insisted, one must seek "the best that has been thought
and said in the world" and if, in many areas, much of that best is of
foreign origin, we must expand our horizons rather than exclude it. "Accept
the truth," the Rambam urged, "from whomever states it."...The explicit
systematic discussions of Gentile thinkers often reveal for us the hidden
wealth implicit in our own writings.  They have, furthermore, their own
wisdom, even of a moral and philosophic nature.  Who can fail to be inspired
by the ethical idealism of Plato, the passionate fervor of Augustine, or the
visionary grandeur of Milton? Who can remain unenlightened by the lucidity
of Aristotle, the profundity  of Shakespeare, or the incisiveness of Newman
(MF note: here I ought confess that, unlike R. Lichtenstein, I remain
unmoved by the incisiveness of Newman, but possibly only because I've never
heard of him - my excuse is that I was kind of a techie student and not
really expected to wield graceful english sentences, philosophical insights,
or eat with a fork). There is chochma bagoyim and we ignore it at our loss.
Many of the issues which concern us have faced Gentile writers as well. The
very problem we are considering has a long Christian history, going back to
Tertullian and beyond.  To deny that many fields have been better cultivated
by non-jewish rather than jewish writers is to be stubbornly - and
un-necessarily - chauvinistic.  There is nothing in our medieval poetry to
rival Dante and nothing in our modern literature to compare with Kant, and
we would do well to admit it.  We have our own genius, and we have bent it
to the noblest of pursuits, the development of Torah.  But we cannot be
expected to do everything."

Whew.  Try that on with the author's name removed at some of our local
educational institutions and the only reason it might not be immediately
dismissed as apiqorsus would be the lack of identification of some of these
suggested exemplars as Church fathers, such is the state of modern
education.  Of course excerpting a writer's work always does disservice,
since it pares away the fuller context in which R. Lichtenstein is at great
pains to explain the necessary primacy of torah and the implications this
must have for the educational process.  But nevertheless, here we have an
authentic daas torah expression.  Food for thought - or in many circles -
for  the fishes.

Mechy Frankel				H: (301) 593-3949
michael.frankel@dtra.mil			W: (703) 325-1277

Zoes Hatorah, Odom Ki Yomus be'Ohel.

Sometime Torah needs mesiras nefesh.

Indeed not every child is perpared for mesiras nefesh...


Question is, how many parents of children  - who are willing to learn yomom 
volaylo- are being held back by the parents who fear the potential intense 
acheivement by their children.

Only HKBH knows for sure.

Remember: Both Avrohom AND Yitzchok were prepared for Mesiras Nefesh.  If either
one backed out there'd be no akeido.

Rich Wolpoe 

  

In a message dated 6/29/99 2:30:12 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
richard_wolpoe@ibi.com writes:

<< 
 Zoes Hatorah, Odom Ki Yomus be'Ohel.
 
 Sometime Torah needs mesiras nefesh.
 
 Indeed not every child is perpared for mesiras nefesh...
 
 
 Question is, how many parents of children  - who are willing to learn yomom 
 volaylo- are being held back by the parents who fear the potential intense 
 acheivement by their children.
 
 Only HKBH knows for sure.
 
 Remember: Both Avrohom AND Yitzchok were prepared for Mesiras Nefesh.  If 
either
 one backed out there'd be no akeido.
 
 Rich Wolpoe 
  >>
OK - obviously we disagree but just for the record I don't believe that the 
only or necessarily primary way to show misirut nefesh is to learn yomam 
valayla.  Each case is different and needs to be evaluated separately.  I 
doubt that many parents fear the potential intense achievement by their 
children. It would be an interesting study to evaluate the reasons of 100 
children who want to learn yomam valayla and the results thereof - but I 
think we've debated that before.
 
Kol Tuv,
Joel Rich

Eli Turkel wrote:
<<
1. The Rivash has a long responsa on semicha (reinstituted in his day
   in Germany to give some rabbis control over psak). Basically, he
   says what Moshe brings that semicha is permission from the rebbe
   to pasken while the rebbe is alive.

2. Modern semicha - which is basically simply a title to distinguish a
   talmud chacham from others. It has no halachik status. It is usually
   obtained only by dayanim or shul rabbis not roshei yeshivot.
   Rav Soloveitchik received semicha only when he was ready to travel to
   America. I doubt if Rav Chaim brisker has semicha.
>>

Does this mean that there is no issur to pasken for others without semicha 
(if your rebbe is no longer alive)?  Or did #2 (modern semicha) create an 
issur (if so, how?).  Are there any (accessible) articles about this issue?

Kol tuv,
Moshe

(You may reach me at either this address or moshe_feldman@yahoo.com)

Richard Wolpoe states that there is mesirat nefesh involved in sending 
one's child to a board school where the child will learn yomam v'laila, and 
that many parents aren't willing to make such a sacrifice.  I wonder 
whether--in the case of parents who are themselves "serious" Jews--this is 
the case.  My personal concern is that mentioned by Eli Turkel--sacrificing 
the total development of the child (being "moser" his complete "nefesh") 
for the narrow goal of promoting his Torah education.

BTW have their been any psychological studies done comparing children 
raised at home with those raised in a boarding school?

Kol tuv,
Moshe

--- Eli Turkel <turkel@icase.edu> wrote:
> 1. The Rivash has a long responsa on semicha (reinstituted in his
> day
>    in Germany to give some rabbis control over psak). Basically, he
>    says what Moshe brings that semicha is permission from the rebbe
>    to pasken while the rebbe is alive.

Anybody have the cite for this tshuvah?  Eli Turkel is in the States
now and doesn't have the exact cite.

Kol tuv,
Moshe

(You may also write me at mfeldman@cm-p.com)
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

For those who are interested (wouldn't have forwarded this except for the
question raised a while ago!)

Freda Birnbaum

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 14:21:41 -0500
From: David Rosenthal <davidr@shamash.org>
To: jewish-announce@shamash.org
Subject: Jewish Sacramento Arson Update

I am forwarding this information: 

        On Friday, June 18, three Sacramento-area synagogues were the targets
of arsonists. Want to help rebuild? You can make donations to "The Unity
Fund" to aid in the repairs. Make your checks payable to "The Unity Fund",
or to Knesset Israel  Torah Center, or to Congregation B'nai Israel or to
Congregation Beth Shalom and mail them to:

        The Jewish Federation of the Sacramento Region
        2351 Wyda Way
        Sacramento, CA 95825

        The Unity Fund has grown to $53,000 as of June 24, 1999 . Thank you to
everyone who has contributed to rebuilding!

        From the Jewish Federation of Sacramento Home Page:
http://www.jewishsac.org/index.htm.

        There are several stories on CNN On-Line about this arson.  Please see:
http://cnn.com/US/9906/23/synagogue.fires.ap/
http://cnn.com/US/9906/22/synagogue.fires.ap/
http://cnn.com/US/9906/22/synagogue.fires.02/
http://cnn.com/US/9906/18/synagogue.fires.03/
http://cnn.com/US/9906/18/synagogue.fires.02.ap/
http://cnn.com/US/9906/18/synagogue.fires.ap/ 

-------------------- jewish-announce@shamash.org -------------------+
Hosted by Shamash: The Jewish Internet Consortium  http://shamash.org
-------------------- jewish-announce@shamash.org -------------------=

>Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 12:07:43 -0400
>From: "Noah Witty" <nwitty@ix.netcom.com>
>Subject: Sheep & anesthesiology consent on shabbos
>
>I at first (because I did not read carefully) thought that this woman is
>batty. She needs an operation; it's pikuach nefesh; do it. The end. If that
>had been the case, her teachers and rabbis would according to some
>interpretations (not that of Bais Yosef) would be culpable for her death
>and/or her pain.


You still did not read carefully.  The article's dateline is Thursday 24
June, and it referred to the story as happening "yesterday", i.e.,
Wednesday 23 June; hence there is no issue of Chilul Shabbat.  Ergo, your
analysis is not relevant to the issue (and may not be correct to boot - the
moral of the story is that excessive piety is not ipso facto laudable and
can be deadly; it can also lead to the destruction of the Beit Hamikdash
(see Kamtza U'Bar Kamtza) but that is a different story).


>But now, I see that the *doctors* wanted the signature.  That is NOT pikuach
>nefesh; that is administrative, insurance liability, covering onesself.
>Especialy in Israel one must imagine

Why **MUST** one imagine? They may have asked for a quick signature as a
matter of routine and that triggered her refusal for the operation pending
the "psak".  Israeli hospitals, especially in dati or chareidi areas are
much more sensitive than that in dealing with Shabbat issues, and this was
not even on Shabbat.  Be careful when you play the pikuach nefesh game.


>Now, do you place a phone call on shabbos to find out if you can be mechalel
>shabbos in this fashion?  As most  of this list's readership is aware, many
>hold that phone is only derabbanan on shabbos.

If it were shabbat (which it wasn't in this case but let's assume it was)
what good would it do to call a posek on the phone?  He wouldn't know that
a piku'ach nefesh she'eilah was waiting for him at the other end & hence,
he wouldn't answer the phone.  Ergo, this is a classical case of a safek
(at best, more likely a vadai) piku'ach nefesh when you are supposed to be
machmir -- not on Shabbat but on piku'ach nefesh!!

Assuming the couple in question were from the Tzefat area (the article says
the story took place in a Tzefati hospital), there have been a number of
cases of Hareidim who have been slow to get medical help in emgergency
situations or relying on "natural" healing or homeopathy instead of medical
science (that dirty word, "Science"!!).  In many cases, those involved are
Breslovers or have Breslover leanings, with less than minimal secular
education that would help them understand the doctor's concern or that
homeopathy is hogwash.  Many are starry eyed hozrei b'tshuva who think they
need to ask their Rav about doing **ANYTHING**.

Early on Yitzchak Zirkind summed it up most succinctly:  "Hashoeil Harei
Zeh Shofeich Damim, V'hanish'al Harei Zeh M'guneh Shehoyoh Lo Lidrosh
Brabim Shemuttor".


.............................................................................
                             Hershel Ginsburg, Ph.D.
              Licensed Patent Attorney and Biotechnology Consultant
                          P.O. Box 1058 / Rimon St. 27
                                  Efrat, 90435
                                    Israel
              Phone: 972-2-993-8134        FAX: 972-2-993-8122
                         e-mail: ginzy@netvision.net.il
.............................................................................

Moshe Feldman wrote:

> --- Eli Turkel <turkel@icase.edu> wrote:
> > 1. The Rivash has a long responsa on semicha (reinstituted in his
> > day
> >    in Germany to give some rabbis control over psak). Basically, he
> >    says what Moshe brings that semicha is permission from the rebbe
> >    to pasken while the rebbe is alive.
>
> Anybody have the cite for this tshuvah?  ...

The tshuva of the Rivash is #271.

There are a lot of half truths and misinformation being churned
out on this thread. The issue is equivalent to a secular law student
asking why anyone must obey any authority and what exactly is the basis of
authority.  There is no simple answer. As Berger writes in his
recent book on Rabbinic Authority the mere asking of the question is an
indication that there is an absence of authority or at least a
feeling of uncertainty about the validity of current authority. He concludes
the question is  bad i.e., - unproductive and ultimately unanswerable.
Instead he asserts we should focus on describing the accepted
processes of authority of those belonging to a particular "Interpretive
community".
During most of our history - the question was irrelevant. It was
simply accepted that a talmid chachom's conclusion carried more weight
than a bal habos. The problem was primarily knowing which talmid chachom
to follow. Today is different -for many reasons - one of the main
factors is the ready access to seforim - such as the Mishna Berura and 
igros Moshe - which any yeshiva graduate can read as well as summaries
of halacha which any grade school graduate can understand. Today
- seforim are our rebbes.

The Rivash's tshuva was written in response to a major conflict
involving a gadol in Austria who asserted that only he had the right to
decide the rabbinic authorities in France. The Rivash disagreed. The dispute
was never resolved.

There is much material on this subject and I don't think it can
be intelligently comprehended - much less summarized - without going
through the material in depth. (But I still don't think you are going to
find "the answer")

A good place to start is Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan's Handbook Volume 1
and go though all the footnotes on the chapters on Sanhedrin, Authority
and Halacha.

                                       Daniel Eidensohn

It is my impression that the only way to "remove" mamzerut is to have
the mamzer marry a shifcha (non-Jew who agrees to become the "slave"
of a Jew).  The children of the shifcha are considered regular Jews. 
Rabbi Tendler of Monsey did this at least once (that's what I seem to
recall from Rabbi Mordechai Willig's shiur circa 1983).

Does anyone else have information on this?

Kol tuv,
Moshe

> > He can marry another mamzer or a
> convert
> >and there even exist ways of removing mamzerut.
> >
> >Eli Turkel

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

Actually, a lot of the information which would be of interest to Agudath
Israel folks is available at the shemayisrael website.

>Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 12:07:43 -0400
>From: "Noah Witty" <nwitty@ix.netcom.com>
>Subject: Sheep & anesthesiology consent on shabbos
>
>I at first (because I did not read carefully) thought that this woman is
>batty. She needs an operation; it's pikuach nefesh; do it. The end. If that
>had been the case, her teachers and rabbis would according to some
>interpretations (not that of Bais Yosef) would be culpable for her death
>and/or her pain.
..
..
..

>Now, do you place a phone call on shabbos to find out if you can be mechalel
>shabbos in this fashion?  As most  of this list's readership is aware, many
>hold that phone is only derabbanan on shabbos.

One more point.  Even assuming the incident occurred on Shabbat (which
according to the date line of the article, it did not) isn't a woman who
just gave birth, including a routine normal birth, b'chezkat piku'ach
nefesh for the first 3 days post-partum, to the extent that she is exempt
from fasting on Yom Kippur.  Therefore, if the were any complication
whatsoever immediately after giving birth (e.g., a stuck placenta, with
blood loss), presumably she would be no less  b'chezkat piku'ach nefesh,
and reasonably likely even more so.

Ergo, the lady's actions are inexplicable, and inexcuseable.

hg


.............................................................................
                             Hershel Ginsburg, Ph.D.
              Licensed Patent Attorney and Biotechnology Consultant
                          P.O. Box 1058 / Rimon St. 27
                                  Efrat, 90435
                                    Israel
              Phone: 972-2-993-8134        FAX: 972-2-993-8122
                         e-mail: ginzy@netvision.net.il
.............................................................................

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


[ Distributed to the Avodah mailing list, digested version.                   ]
[ To post: mail to avodah@aishdas.org                                         ]
[ For back issues: mail "get avodah-digest vXX.nYYY" to majordomo@aishdas.org ]
[ or, the archive can be found at http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/              ]
[ For general requests: mail the word "help" to majordomo@aishdas.org         ]