Avodah Mailing List

Volume 03 : Number 170

Wednesday, August 18 1999

• Re: Chazal and Advanced Technology
• Re: Ma'aseh B'reishis
• Re: Ellul Humor Alert
• Repeating for vocalization change
• arba minim
• Midgets critcizing Giants
• Chazal's access to advanced technology
• Re: Repeating for vocalization change
• keter 'aram tzova/ Breuer's chumash
• kol korei - Breuer - ta'amei mikra
• Slight correction
• Sun damage
• Re: Repeating for vocalization change
• eclipse - NO bracha
• Re: Wagner's Music
• re: Mitzvos Ma'asiyos of the Season
• Rav Teichtal, Yishuv Haaretz and Chozer Bo
• Re: Rav Teichtal, Yishuv Haaretz and Chozer Bo
• Brushing teeth on Shabbos
• Brushing teeth on Shabbos
• Hebrew language
• Re: Hebrew Language

In a message dated 8/17/99 10:17:40 AM EST, richard_wolpoe@ibi.com writes:

>  spirituality.  I object to the supposition that somehow our science gives 
us a 
>  certain superiro edge over those poor well-meaing sages of long ago who 
were 

First let me agree 100% with this statement

> If for example a  Tanna 
>  was able to convert vinegar into oil, perhaps he had access to some form 
of 
>  "alchemy".  We tend to dismiss these stories as non-literal - and indeed 
they 
>  might be.  It is also possible that said Tanna had the advanced cheical 
know-
> how  to pull it off.

The Loshon Hagimoroh is Mi Sheomar Lshemen Vyadlik Yomar Lchometz Vyadlik, 
not that the properties were changed.

>  And it is also possible that Eliyohu, Elisha, as well as the Amoraim on  
Purim 
>  were able to "revive the dead" with some sophisticated techniques that 
would 
>  make mouth-to-mouth resusicitaion primitive by comparison.

As to the Nvi'im there is no reason to deny that it was a miracle, (see Reish 
Taanis Mafteiach Shel Tchiyas Hameisim) Umfurosh in Rambam Yesodei Hatorah 
10:1, as to Rabboh and R' Zeira on Purim, the Gemarah says that "he prayed" 
Vsu Loi, OTOH there is the Gemara that Simtre helps (see B"M 74 and Yevomos 
Reish Perek 15).

  
>  It is also possible that Elisha cured Naaman via various chemical 
properties 
>  excluse to the Yarden.

Bpashtus it was a Miracle.


>  My friends we are talking about a paradigm shift in udnerstanding all of  
these 
>  things - a shift people are unwilling to make.  Not only is that shift 
quite 
>  simple, it makes all of the "magic" throughout our literature quite 
accessible 

The problem with this is also removing the Ikkar that HKB"H can make 
miracles, the Rambam in his self defense about Techiyas Hameisim says clearly 
that he didn't elaborate on this as this is purely Miracle, which one must 
believe in.

KVCT

Yitzchok Zirkind

>  In v3n168, Yitzchok Zirkind <Yzkd@aol.com> writes:
>  : As I understand it, we cannot know "how we came to be" meaning Yesh 
M'ayin 
> is 
>  : not Bcheik Nivra only Bcheik Haborei...
>  
>  If this is what the Maharal meant, he would have limited ma'aseh bireishis 
 to
>  the first few pesukim, not all the way until the end of Friday. 

He discusses also Seder of things as not understood, which goes till the end 
of creation.

>  Remember  also
>  that the Rambam claims that the pesukim can (in theory) be understood as 
not
>  referring to yeish mei'ayin at all.

Actually I was considering deleting this line, or to add see Ramban, but it 
doesn't change my point.

>  
>  :                                    (i.e. Brioh means Yesh Mayin, Oretz 
> means 
>  : earth, Shomayim means heaven, Sheishes Yomim means six days)
>  
>  Well, "oretz" could mean "earth" or "the physical universe". Similarly,
>  "shamayim" means "heaven" -- but both are ambiguous, do we mean "sky/space"
>  or "the non-physical domain outside this universe".

There is no reason to say that it does not mean "earth", so by all standards 
that is Pshutoi not a Mashal, as to Shomayim why should I say it doesn't 
include the Galgalim (as the Rambam says in Yesodei Hatorah 3:1) why should I 
further be Motzee Mipshutoi from the Possuk "Vayiten Osom E-lokim Brkia 
Hashomayim"/

>  
>  Similarly days. In contemporary physics, measuring time without a reference
>  frame is believed to be meaningless.

But the Gemara in Chagiga 12a says the opposite.

>  However, I don't see how you can say the Torah's p'shat describes what
>  occured any better. The Maharal uses this as one of the cases where 
chochmah
>  will exceed nevu'ah in scope.

But this "Chachma" is extrapolated from the Torah itself.

KVCT

Yitzchok Zirkind

In a message dated 8/17/99 12:09:56 PM EST, richard_wolpoe@ibi.com writes:

> The Rebbe thought for a while, looked at the painter and then pronounced: 
>  "Repaint, Repaint, and thin no more." 
>  
A Maftir said "KI Tzu Ltzu Ku Lku" the Rabbi responded "Zayir Shain Zayir 
Shain"

KVCT

Yitzchok Zirkind

R. Moshe Feldman asks:

>Question: What is the definition of mishaneh et ha'inyan, for which
>we cause a ba'al koreh to repeat what he read (see OC 142)?  Does it
>mean (1) that the meaning of words changes (here, it clearly does),
>or (2) that the concept/idea is changed (here, I'm not so sure--is
>there ultimately any difference between innocent blood and blood ofan
innocent)?

I have always assumed it was the former.

I would also add that I spoke once with a person who often served as a
ba'al keri'ah in the "Shtieblach" in the Katamon neighborhood of
Yerushalayim, and he told me that he was once corrected by R. Aharon
Lichtestein for reading dam (with a patach) instead of dom (with a
kamatz), or vice versa.

Kol tuv,

Eli Clark

> 
> I semi-agree, depending on what kind of approval is involved. I would love it
> if someone who learnt hilchos lulav v'esrog more recently and more completely
> than I did gave a hechsher to my 4 minim. However, once guaranteed of being
> yotzei the chiyuv, I would want to shop on my own for hiddurim. I hazard to
> guess that such shopping is a hiddur mitzvah of greater value than some of
> those I look for in the esrog itself.
> 
In Israel one usually buys each of the arba minim separately. In the last few
years they have come out with hadasim under various hasgachot and I find the
quality quite good. I find this much better than the way of years ago to
good through hundreds of hadasim to find meshulash.

Is there any mitzva to work hard to set up the mitzva?
I.e. is there a downside to having a succah that is easy to put up?
I am aware of a mitzva to walk (run) to shul and have stories of people
parking a block away so that they could walk the last block. Is there such
a concept for other mitzvot?

Eli Turkel

I am having great difficulty dealing with the righteous
condemnation of various gedolim by members of our group. Aside
from the serious question of whether there is any heter for
such public pronouncements - I find them rather distasteful and
unpleasant to read. They stand in strong distinction to the
majority of postings which inform and uplift and/or raise
important concerns on a wide variety of topics. I'd like to
propose a rule governing these condemnations.

No criticism of a recognized gadol can be made - unless it is
based upon reliable statements from a major talmid chochim.

If I am informed that Rav Soleveitchik or Rav Hutner had
strongly condemned Rebbe X for his conduct - I have learned
something of value. If I read, however, that a chaver of this
group - feels that certain gedolim are a disgrace to the
profession - I have learned nothing of value. If there are no
public pronouncements denouncing that particular gadol - that
must mean that our rebbes and rosh yeshivos must have felt that
condemnations should not be made. The insistence of being more
zealous than our Teachers - is itself one of the major reasons
for the continuing disputes of Klal Yisroel.

The above does not mean that I am against criticizing gedolim
c.v.. Chazon Ish supposedly said that one can only speak lashon
haRah about the errors of a genuine gadol. There is no to'eles
about saying bad things about someone who does not determine
the nature of yiddishkeit. But at the same time there is no
to'eles of  condemnations  - which have no basis in the
pronouncements of gedolim. We are all midgets. First find a
gadol whose shoulder you can stand on.


                         Daniel Eidensohn

>It's not 
>that Chazal need to be considered infallible, rather we need to scrutinize them 
>with great deference and humility. 

Your point is well taken, although I guess I'm still having a little difficulty with the paradigm shift.  Let me try to rephrase the argument, adding a point of my own:

For a given statement by Chazal, X, which we don't (yet) understand, there exist a few options:

1. Chazal had access to uniquely advanced ideas which we do not understand, which are inadequately expressed in the language of the Gemara as X.

2. Chazal had access to advanced ideas which we do not understand, expressed in the Gemara as X and in contemporaneous texts as X'.  For various reasons we might understand X' better than X.  

3. Chazal determined X through their knowledge of contemporary science.  

I agree that we can't be sure which of the above applies, but why couldn't we investigate 2 or 3?  This neither rejects 1 out of hand nor is undeferential or arrogant with respect to Chazal.

Sholem Berger

In a message dated 8/17/99 3:14:56 PM EST, clarke@HUGHESHUBBARD.COM writes:

> I would also add that I spoke once with a person who often served as a
>  ba'al keri'ah in the "Shtieblach" in the Katamon neighborhood of
>  Yerushalayim, and he told me that he was once corrected by R. Aharon
>  Lichtestein for reading dam (with a patach) instead of dom (with a
>  kamatz), or vice versa.
>  
What if a Baal Korei said Bein Dam Ldom instead of Bein Dom Ldom (Parshas 
Shoftim)?

KVCT

Yitzchok Zirkind

I made the mistake of asking the following as part of a different
comment (dam/dom), so it may not have been noticed.  I am therefore
repeating the question:

Is Breuer's chumash, which is based on keter 'aram tzova
(at least starting in the middle of sefer dvarim), clearly the most
correct?  I understand that in the charedi community in Israel there
is now a big argument on this issue.  Does anyone know what the
svarah is of those who are against Breuer's chumash?  What about his
methodology (described in his hakdamah) of deciding based on a
majority of manuscripts for the majority of chumash, for which he
does not have the keter 'aram tzova?



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

R' Moshe Feldman writes re kol korei:   Russell's explanation is based on R.
Mordechai Breuer's book on Ta'amei Hamikra 

In a previous posting I recommended the supplement in Vol 20 Encycl. Talmudit for an 
explanation of trop. That supplement also gives a second shita for sentence 
breakdown somewhat different from that of R' Mord. Breuer.  Correction:  it gives the 
other as shita A' and Breuer as shita B'.

R' Moshe Feldman writes:  Bannett argued that even though the
original psak of the Bet Yitzhak was wrong...

Who me? Just the opposite. Before the Bet Yitzhak the concept was that the current 
itself was esh. The Bet Yitzhak was the first I know not to say that and thus to get it 
right technically. He said molid, and  compared it to molid re'ach, i.e., the current 
entering the dead device brings a new living device into being. 

A posting mentions that "seeing an eclipse for a second is not more harmful than 
seeing the sun for a second".  Another says "there is no danger when the eclipse is 
complete".  

Warning: Looking at a full eclipse can be more dangerous than looking at the sun for 
the same time.  When looking at sun, the iris is closed down.  When looking at the full 
eclipse the iris is wide open and the ultra violet in the corona can do damage. 

I had asked:
<<
What is the definition of mishaneh et ha'inyan, for which
we cause a ba'al koreh to repeat what he read (see OC 142)?  Does it
mean (1) that the meaning of words changes (here, it clearly does),
or (2) that the concept/idea is changed (here, I'm not so sure--is
there ultimately any difference between innocent blood and blood of
an innocent)?
>>

R. Eli Clark preferred #1.

Question: how do you explain the Beur Halacha on OC 142 s.v. "ein machzirin"
who quotes the Gra to the effect that the difference between mitzrayim (with
one yud) and mitzreeyeem (with two yuds) is not mishaneh et ha'inyan?  I
assume that mitzrayim = Egypt and mitzreeyeem = Egyptians; these are two
different words.  For that matter, many poskim (quoted in MB 142:4) give the
example of Aharon vs. haron (without the alef) as not being mishaneh et
ha'inyan; aren't these two different words?

Kol tuv,
Moshe

According to my notes, when I was learning at Ohr Somayach in
Yerushalayim (circa 1978-80), I asked Rav Mordechai Shakovitzky z"l, and
he said that Oseh Maaseh B'reishis is NOT said on an eclipse, neither of
the sun nor of the moon, because it is a "siman ra".

Thus far, I have not seen any seforim explicitly mention eclipses in this
context, neither for saying the bracha, nor for not saying it.

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.

Shaul Weinreb wrote: <<

Most interestingly, I heard him on the radio expressing disbelief at the
prominent Jewish musicians (Mehta and Birnbaum) who were so willing to
perform his music.  >>

If I am not mistaken, Mehta is Indian (i.e., from India) and not Jewish.
He is, however, the musical director of the Israel Philharmonic Orchestra.

Kol tuv,
Shlomo Godick 

In Avodah 3:168, Sender Baruch wrote <<< Something that I feel is
symptomatic of this "disconnect", is the trend towards purchasing
"pre-approved" Esrog/Lulav sets. Yes, there is a l'shem Shomayim, but in
my experience the lack of personal involvement definitely takes away from
the connection to the mitzva. >>>

I most definitely agree that when one invests his time and effort in
looking for an Esrog/Lulav which is beautiful to *him*, it can create an
emotional connection. And sharing ideas about how to acheive that
connection is what this thread is all about.

But every person is different, every mitzvah is different, and every
esrog is different. So I want to share with you all something which turns
*me* on. I had been pondering this ever since this thread started, and
now the time is ripe for me to say that I feel MORE of this "connection"
from the pre-approved sets than when I go to pick it myself. I will now
explain why:

To me, there are two hidurim which override all others when it comes to
picking the Arba Minim. This is not to belittle the idea of the esrog's
shape or lulav's straightness, but these two ideas (TO ME!) are more
important than those. Namely, (1) The arba minim should be kosher
l'halacha. (2) Choshen Mishpat is as important as Orach Chaim.

I will now elaborate: The idea that the arba minim should be kosher is so
obvious that many people don't give it a second thought. And that's a
shame, because too many people think they know the halachos well enough,
but they don't. Yes, I suppose that the halachos of lulav and esrog are
less complicated than the halachos of a mezuzah, but it is still a big
responsibility, and I'd much prefer that an expert check it, not I.

Many people select a nice esrog and then bring it to a rav for
inspection. Sorry. Been there, done that. Too many Choshen Mishpat
problems. It could get damaged in transit, one could forget to bring it
back, and many other eventualities. not to mention hondeling
(bargaining). I see a table with three boxes of esrogim, marked with
different prices. People pick them up, look at them, and *most* end up in
the box they came from. Or maybe the prices are not unmarked, so I ask
the dealer "How much for this one?" and the dealer tries to decide how
much I am willing to spend for it. That same esrog already had several
prices on it today, for different people with different bargaining
abilities.

No thanks. I connect to the mitzvah of lulav and esrog when I go to the
local yeshiva, where I pay the same price as everyone else in town, and I
am handed a set which has been checked by the rav and/or his assistants.
I carry it home carefully, joyful in the knowledge that it is kosher, and
that no one was hurt in the process. I gently lay it down on the table,
and I open the package with emotions similar to those when I check my
lottery ticket against the winners list. How straight is the lulav that
Hashem sent me? How round is the esrog in my hand? How meshulash are
these hadasim?

Do they have all the chumros? No, only the ones that are most important
to *me*.

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.

From Shlomo B Abeles
Subject: Rav Teichtal, Yishuv Haaretz and Chozer Bo

Saul Weinreb  wrote:

>...those who speculate if the Munkatcher Rebbe would have
 >been ''chozer bo''...you fail to observe the post
>holocaust behavior of practically every
 >chassidishe rebbe with the exeption of Satmar... their
 >emphasis post war on settling and building in Eretz Yisrael
 >B'Davka.  Ger, Belz, Klausenberg, Boyan/Rizhin...
>Rav Teichtal is so upset ...
> that the chassidic leaders in prewar Europe did not
>emphasize the importance of
>building the yishuv and making aliyah...

It is undeniable that most Chassidic groups have, since the
war, established themselves and greatly expanded their
 numbers in Eretz Yisroel. (Even Satmar has Shikunim
Yeshivos, and many other institutions
 in Jerusalem, Bnei Brak and Netanya.)

However the opposition of most Gedolim to the idea
 of Yishuv and Binyan Haaretz prior to the war was
 (besides the Munkatchers genuine belief in the
 imminent Geula Sh'leima) because the the leaders
and most of  those involved were non-religious and
they were  concerned that their Chasidim should
not end up like the many  observant Jews who
soon lost their way.

This changed dramatically after the war when tens
 of thousands of chasidim and charedim arrived with
 their manhigim who immediately established social and
 educational institutions and infrastructure for them
and their families ensuring that they did not stray
and thus guaranteeing  that  yishuv haaretz did
not come at the high cost of  abandonment of
 Torah and  Mitzvos. As we all know these
 post-war European religious immigrants not
only preserved their  Yiddishkeit but have
 grown into a mighty force of Torah-true Jews.

On the other hand, look at what happened to the
 Sfardi Jewry who unfortunately did not have the
strong leadership of European Chassidim and
Charedim and despite the fact that nearly all
were religious in their countries of origin , hundreds
of thousands of them were  led astray.
(Here may I quote a recent post
from Carl Shereron the Mail Jewish mailing list):
 "Thousands of traditional Jews were
forcefully torn from "traditional"
 Judaism the moment they got off the Magic
 Carpet in the 1950's.  They were torn away
from their parents, had their peyos cut off,
and were sent to places like Degania and
Degania Bet for "re- education." If you
came on aliya in the late 40's or the 50's,
you either joined the Labor Party and agreed
 to work on Shabbos, or you did not get a job. Not
only did you not get a job - you didn't get a place
 to live either. You stayed in the Maabarot (tin
shacks that were boiling hot in summer and
freezing cold in winter) until you joined the Labor
 Party and the Histadrut"

 Would this be  what the pre-war European
 Gedolim were so concerned about.
Chochom Odif Minovi...

What we should be asking is: Had we been zocheh
that Rav Teichtal HYD  survive the Nazi's,
and had he indeed witnessed the tragic impact
 that Yishuv Haaretz had on the
 soul of Sfardi Jewry, what are the chances that
 HE would have (again) been  'Chozer Bo' - this
 time from his views in Em Habonim S'mecho'?

SBA

In a message dated 8/18/99 8:15:18 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sba@blaze.net.au 
writes:

<< 
 from Carl Shereron the Mail Jewish mailing list):
  "Thousands of traditional Jews were
 forcefully torn from "traditional"
  Judaism the moment they got off the Magic
  Carpet in the 1950's.  They were torn away
 from their parents, had their peyos cut off,
 and were sent to places like Degania and
 Degania Bet for "re- education." If you
 came on aliya in the late 40's or the 50's,
 you either joined the Labor Party and agreed
  to work on Shabbos, or you did not get a job. Not
 only did you not get a job - you didn't get a place
  to live either. You stayed in the Maabarot (tin
 shacks that were boiling hot in summer and
 freezing cold in winter) until you joined the Labor
  Party and the Histadrut"
 
  Would this be  what the pre-war European
  Gedolim were so concerned about.
 Chochom Odif Minovi...
 
 What we should be asking is: Had we been zocheh
 that Rav Teichtal HYD  survive the Nazi's,
 and had he indeed witnessed the tragic impact
  that Yishuv Haaretz had on the
  soul of Sfardi Jewry, what are the chances that
  HE would have (again) been  'Chozer Bo' - this
  time from his views in Em Habonim S'mecho'?
 
 SBA
  >>
If the concern for not participating in shivat zion was limited to the Sfardi 
experience you ascribe to lack of leadership, It would seem that the more 
intuitive solution would have been for the gedolei Europe to have led their 
flocks back to eretz Yisrael where they could have studied torat yisraael 
amongst am yisrael. It seems there must have been more to it

KT,Kvct

Joel Rich

from a recent issue:

+ACI-In fact,  Rav Weiss zt'l in his Tshuvos Minchas
Yitzchok  (vol 3-48, 50 +ACY- vol. 5-104) writes
that IN ADDITION  to concerns with Sechita,
(Kibus?), Memare'ach, Assias Chabura, tearing
or breaking the bristles of the toothbrush there
is ALSO  the problem of Uvda D'chol.+ACI-

There are two types of sechita: one a tolada of melabain, the other a
tolada/derabanan of dosh.
The teshuva cited probably intended the latter.

Perhaps it was thought to be uvdah dechol because scrubbing is usually a
non-shabbos activity or associated with such non-Shabbos activities.

NW

+ACI-Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 23:50:10 -0400
From: Russell J Hendel +ADw-rjhendel+AEA-juno.com+AD4-
Subject: Dam Dom

I was quite sympathetic to Moshe's suggestion that
it is just a question of Semicuth (like ETH, AYTH)+ACI-


Could someone state what eth and eyth +ACo-mean+ACo- and then inform us what it
means to have those words besmichut.

Noah Witty asks:
: Could someone state what eth and eyth *mean* and then inform us what it
: means to have those words besmichut.

I can field the first part of the question. "Es" means that the next word
is the object of the sentence, and not the subject. In English, we rely on
word order: "Bob ate the chicken" is very different than "The chicken ate
Bob". Its existence means a much greater variety of word orders can be
understood. "Baruch achal es hatarnigol" is identical in meaning to "Es
hatarnigol achal Baruch". (Although the latter might sound strange to people
used to post-biblical Hebrew, where "es" is optional.)

According to R' Shim'on Aslani (at least, his hava amina -- unless he
could have heard R' Akiva resolve the problem with this approach) and Rabbi
Akiva, the word is a ribui. I guess this means they hold that "Baruch achahl
hatarnigol" is perfectly fine biblical Hebrew, and therefore the "es" adds
nothing to p'shat that couldn't be resolved with a tighter grammar.

According to RSR Hirsch, it is a milder form of the same metaroot as
the phonetically related /aleph-yud-dalet/ (a handle).

I have no idea how semichut would apply. So I leave the "and then" to someone
else.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 18-Aug-99: Revi'i, Seitzei
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H O"Ch 358:10-16
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 24b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         Melachim-I 13

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


[ 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         ]