Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 171

Thursday, December 9 1999

• Re: cynicism, agunot, solving the problem
• Re: cynicism, agunot, solving the problem
• Shirei Aku"m
• Re: cynicism, agunot, solving the problem
• Re: co-opting music
• Re: cynicism, agunot, solving the problem...
• Re: co-opting music
• RE: cynicism, agunot, solving the problem...
• [none]
• Re: Avodah V4 #169
• Re[4]: co-opting music
• Re[2]: Is it on the Level
• Re[2]: cynicism, agunot, solving the problem
• Re: cynicism, agunot, solving the problem
• Slonimer Yichus
• Agunah
• Mesaye'a
• co-opting music -- halakhic sources (finally)
• Re: Mesaye'a
• Re: co-opting music -- halakhic sources (finally)

<<If you're not able to be part of the solution, at least don't defend an
unjust system, or say that it's impossible to fix it.  The very least I'd
expect from a "Torah" person is that he understand that there is a
problem!! >>

Who doesn't understand that there is a problem?  But I think that we
have been trained by our highly technologized society to think that every
problem has a solution.  As Jews we know that many problems have
only provisional or inadequate or *no* solutions (witness the Arab-Israeli
conflict as a prime example) and that the true solution will arrive with
Bias Goel Tzedek.  Not that we should become quietist and stop trying.
But we should have the humility to understand that our efforts may not
bear fruit, that a systematic solution is not inevitable.  This realization
should not be confused with cold-heartedness or apathy towards the
suffering women.   I think to accuse rabbanim of such is an incredible
avla (as if the accusers have a monopoly on compassion).

Kol tuv,
Shlomo Godick

Something that everyone is overlooking here is this:

The Torah is perfect.

Hashem knew what he was doing and foresaw that there will be agunos.

Also, the halacha perscibes beating the mesarev.

Although this is not always possible, social pressure and ostracism may be
brought to bear.

If everything has been tried to no avail, then we must assume that Hashem
wanted it that way.

YM





Shlomo Godick wrote:

> <<If you're not able to be part of the solution, at least don't defend an
> unjust system, or say that it's impossible to fix it.  The very least I'd
> expect from a "Torah" person is that he understand that there is a
> problem!! >>
>
> Who doesn't understand that there is a problem?  But I think that we
> have been trained by our highly technologized society to think that every
> problem has a solution.  As Jews we know that many problems have
> only provisional or inadequate or *no* solutions (witness the Arab-Israeli
> conflict as a prime example) and that the true solution will arrive with
> Bias Goel Tzedek.  Not that we should become quietist and stop trying.
> But we should have the humility to understand that our efforts may not
> bear fruit, that a systematic solution is not inevitable.  This realization
> should not be confused with cold-heartedness or apathy towards the
> suffering women.   I think to accuse rabbanim of such is an incredible
> avla (as if the accusers have a monopoly on compassion).
>
> Kol tuv,
> Shlomo Godick

It's quite shocking that hardly any posts on the carrols question see
anything wrong with blatantly Xian music - besides the meaning which "peace
on earth and good will to man" had to our People throughout the centuries
(including our own).

Igros Moshe in YO"D B ch 111 (also ch 56 - please read them before
equivocating) clearly prohibits listening to the words-and-music of any song
which contains praise or favor to a foreign deity, not to mention the fact
that a number of the expamples referred to in the posts are also liturgical.

As to music-without-words, Reb Moshe (op cit) regards it as "only" mechu'ar,
so one would presumably not be able to state a clear issur in that regard.
But that would hardly justify the high regard (in the sense of "lo
tecahnem") that appears on these pages.


The "co-opting" issue is another one entirely, which higher brows than ours
have wrinkled over. Even the *authorities* who are mekil, however, would
draw the line at songs identified with the glory of a foreign deity.



Yaakov Schachter

I'm not responding to any one post but to the issue.

Halacha has solutions for _all_ the problems ever raised and which bring
about Mesoravot Get/Mesoravei Get.

The reasons that they are not implemented are human issues that have to do
with individual Batei Din and their opinion of the various tools (for
instance Rav Filagi's psak that after 18 months a court can render a psak
for Chiyuv Get), whether Charamot DeRabeinu Tam are paskened -- and whether
the community implements them etc.

When I hear of cases where the couple hasn't seen each other (except for in
court) for 10 years and the Beit Din continues to pasken that they should
"try to get together for Shalom Bayit" -- I wonder.

When it is proven in a Beit Din that the woman refusing to accept a Get is
only doing so for financial reasons and not b/c she believes there is any
hope of Shalom Bayit, and the courts don't stop her Mezonot (which was
intended to make it difficult for a man to divorce)   -- I wonder.

When a Dayan says, off the record (which is why I will _not_ mention his
name) that he is afraid for his "Olam Ha'Ba" and therefore will _never_
pasken Chiyuv Get -- I wonder:  isn't it part of our Emunah and Avodat
Hashem that a Dayan has the backing of Hashem in court and if he is honest,
and follows the rules, then whatever he paskens is accepted by Shamayim?
 a la Tanuro Shel Achnai) (BTW, this Dayan regularly recommends that such
cases be heard before other Dayanim).

As a Kalla guide one of the things we tell brides who are afraid that the
Balanit may not have seen a stray hair that it is halacha that if the
Balanit standing over her declares her Tevila Kosher - then MeShamayim they
declare it Kosher.  So why isn't this view accepted by many Dayanim (some,
like Rav Averghill, a great Dayan in Israel have called dayanim on this
issue, you can find his opinion in his Haskama to my husband's book on the
subject of family law in Israel).

I recall that I was told that there are some Dayanim on this list, perhaps
they can enlighten us on this issue from their point of view.

Shoshana L. Boublil (the opinions are my own).

HM wrote: <<

Christmas carols IMHO can be broken down into two
categories, Religiously themed, and non Religious...
"Silent Night" representing the former, and "Jingle
Bell Rock" the latter. There is probably a difference
as to the permissibilty of enjoying one or the other,
even though it's kind of disgusting to listen to even
the non-relgious versions, merely because it is so
associated with the "Season". Unfortunately, I do
enjoy some of that music and whenever I hear a tune
that I like I feel really guilty for enjoying it.  >>

One of the delights of living in EY:  very often Xmas
passes by and I only notice several days afterwards!

Kol tuv,
Shlomo Godick

I would like to address some of the meta-halakhic issues that seem
to be underpinning this debate.

1. It seems that some seem to regard the difference in approach
to halakha by the Conservative and Orthodox schools as a
quantitative one.   The Orthodox approach will be slower and more
tortuous, but "if there is a rabbinic will, there is a halakhic way", and
the objective will eventually be reached.   Both approaches effectively
dissolve the heteronomy/autonomy dialectic, with the autonomous
human fashioning of halacha winning the day.

2.  The other view of Orthodoxy preserves the dialectic in positing that
the human decisor is a *partner* with G-d in determining the halacha
but that he does not have a free hand.   He is constrained by the rules
of psak.

3. Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik has pointed out that while Reform and
Conservative Judaism are governed by aesthetic and sentimental
considerations, the Halakha is informed by a mathematical, scientific
approach.   I don't think this means that empathy and humane concern
has no place in determining halacha.    I think what it is does mean that
compassion can motivate adopting one halachic view over another,
or preferring a lenient rule or conceptualization over a stringent one.
But it cannot create a new halachic approach ex nihilo, it cannot
break the rules.

4. Why are people more concerned with the welfare of agunot than they
are with men or women who because they are physically handicapped
in one way of another are incapable of finding shidduchim and getting
married even the first time?  One will answer and say that the latter suffer
from given physical realities over which we have no control.   But if
halakha creates a mitzius in this world and the posek's ability to change
this mitizius is constrained by objective, halachic rules, then agunot,
mamzerim, etc. may well be regarded as a tragedy no less objective
than that of the physically handicapped.  If the posek honestly feels he
has tried every possible approach to no avail, then we have yet another
example of cruel reality and can again ask theodicy's question: why do
the righteous suffer?

5.  In fact I would argue that this debate is really an extension of the
debate between objectivist and subjectivist religions.  We who live
or grew up in Western Christian cultures have to be doubly on our
guard that the objectivism of halacha is not compromised by the
subjectivist approach (including the Protestant notions of "personal
conscience" and "situational ethics") of our surrounding culture.

Kol tuv,
Shlomo Godick

HM wrote: <<
One of my favorite pieces is "Ride of the Valkyries"
as is his "Prelude to Lohengrin". I feel guilty for
this but music is funny that way.  If you listen to a
piece and you like it, then you find out the composer
was an Anti-semite,  How are you supposed to unlike
it?  >>

How about anti-Semitic conductors?  Are we supposed to boycott 
the wonderful recordings of Karajin?

Shlomo Godick

> I don't think this means that empathy and humane concern
> has no place in determining halacha.    I think what it is
> does mean that
> compassion can motivate adopting one halachic view over another,
> or preferring a lenient rule or conceptualization over a
> stringent one.

The Torah teaches us not to favor the poor man over the rich man -- which
would seem to indicate that compassion has *no* bearing on the *facts* case.

OTOH, if there are two *equally valid* decisions that could be made based on
the facts, *then* compassion can come into play.

Akiva

===========================
Akiva Atwood
POB 27515
Jerusalem, Israel 91274

-0600
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 06:39:49 -0500 (EST)
From: Avi Feldblum <mljewish@shamash.org>
To: avodah@aishdas.org
Subject: Re: Collecting Money to support learning
In-Reply-To: <199912021644.KAA26780@majordomo1.host4u.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.10.9912090634340.27363-100000@shamash3.shamash.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-avodah@aishdas.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: avodah@aishdas.org

> From: Joelirich@aol.com
> I came across the following excerpt from the kitzur shulchan aruch.  Any 
> ideas as to how this reconciles with our previous discussions concerning 
> Tshuvot that indicate one should take funds in order to continue unabated 
> learning?
> 
> 15. A person should always avoid taking tzedakah, accepting difficulty 
> rather than seeking the assistance of others. Similarly, [Shabbos 118a] 
> states: "Make your Sabbath like a weekday, but do not seek assistance from

> others." Even a dignified Torah Sage who has become impoverished should 
> involve himself in a profession, even a menial profession, rather than 
> accept help from others.

This is actually relatively minor. To have real fun, read what the Rambam
has to say on this topic in his commentary to Pirkei Avot. I've wanted to
make copies of it and send it back with some of the tzedaka requests I get
in the mail. It takes up most of a page in the large shas version of
pirkei avos.

Avi Feldblum
mljewish@shamash.org

In a message dated 12/8/99 9:07:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
Broasters@aol.com writes:

<< 
 So, the Talmud recognizes the possibility that halacha may absolutely 
 preclude someone from having a happy life.  That does not mean that we 
 shouldn't do whatever we can to alleviate this (or any) suffering, but it 
 does certainly mean that wills (rabbinic or otherwise) do not always result 
 in halachic ways.
 
 Meyer
  >>
I think we all know that there are some cases where there is a way and some 
where there isn't.   I assume that the "protesters" feel that not enough 
rabbinic attention has been focused on this issus to really know that it 
falls into the latter category. I assume they would want an agunah "manhattan 
project"(to borrow an analogy from the Rav(JBSoloveitchik)) in which major 
resources are allocated to a complete focus on a problem of major proportions.

Kol Tuv
Joel Rich

cute anecdote:

I was playing a CD with Best of the Opera Overtures when a chover said this one 
is BEAUTIFUL.  I shppeishly told him - you might not want to know this, but it's
Wagner's

Rich Wolpoe


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________

Yes, Richard Wagner, "Yimach Shemo" was an 
Anti-Semite! But his music was as beautiful and 
majestic as was his face and soul ugly!

One of my favorite pieces is "Ride of the Valkyries" 
as is his "Prelude to Lohengrin". I feel guilty for 
this but music is funny that way.  If you listen to a 
piece and you like it, then you find out the composer 
was an Anti-semite,  How are you supposed to unlike 
it?

HM
__________________________________________________ 

In those cases My menoraa behaves like a Dreidel and starts to spin!

Rich W.


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________


In a message dated 12/8/99 12:42:53 PM US Central Standard Time, 
richard_wolpoe@ibi.com writes:

<< Q: what to do with Menorahs whose canldes have differing heights?
 IOW a menorah that appears to be a descending or ascdning diagonal?
  >>

A generous pouring of pre-Kosovo plum brandy will solve the problem, as will 
standing on a skateboard and slowing lifting the appropriate foot.

David Finch

Same for the holocost?! Anti-Semitism?!

Maybe the Chashmonaim should have sat on their hands and accepted the Greek 
defilment of hte Mikodsh as Retzon Hashem?

Doctors should stop researching to fight cnacer or Aids because these too are 
manifest as hashem's Will?

Or Perhaps Moshe should have retorted to Hashem when He said heref mimeni 
v';ashmideim, Omein kein Yehi rotzon?!

Rich Wolpoe

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________



Something that everyone is overlooking here is this:

The Torah is perfect.

Hashem knew what he was doing and foresaw that there will be agunos.

<snip>
If everything has been tried to no avail, then we must assume that Hashem 
wanted it that way.

YM

I am surprised by the comment that read in part:
: Hashem knew what he was doing and foresaw that there will be agunos.
: Also, the halacha perscibes beating the mesarev.
: Although this is not always possible, social pressure and ostracism may be
: brought to bear.
: If everything has been tried to no avail, then we must assume that Hashem
: wanted it that way.

The writer seems to assume that every halachic option has been explored to
either help the agunah or help prevent future agunos. After all he assumes that
"everything has been tried to no avail". The question is whether everything
has actually been tried.

I see the importance of an "Agunah Manhattan Project". Until such a project
fails we can't stand by complacently as say "everything has been tried to no
avail". And by "failure" I mean the project proves that no solution could
possibly exist, not just that they give up looking.

While I've appealed in the past to the number of articles written on the
subject lately, I thank Joel Rich and Jon Baker (particularly the analogies
to the Rav's "Manhattan Project" and to "Machon Tzomet") for convincing me
there's an option we yet need to try.

In the meantime, we ourselves are as much to blame as everyone (e.g. "The
Rabbis") already blamed on the list. Any layperson can actually call batei
din and kollelim, gevirim to fund the project, etc... So, take the time you
would have spent criticizing, pick up the phone, and do something! Avodah
will manage with the loss in volume, trust me.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for  9-Dec-99: Chamishi, Miketz
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 81a
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         

We were recently discussing the background of the Slonimer Chasssidim, etc.  I 
just read an article in a synagogue newspaper that the Slonimer Chassidim were 
descended from the "rebbes" of Lubavich.  Does Anyone have any details?

Rich Wolpoe  

I just went to a shiur last night from Rav Zilberstein on gittin.
He described a case in which he wanted to trick the husband into
giving a get by lying to the husband that the wife had a AIDS or
had an afair or some other such story.

Rav Eliyashiv objected to any such attempts and claimed that the
get would be a "get muteh" no matter how bad the husband was
(in this case he "converted" to Xtiany).

Anyone know of other opinions on the issue?

Eli Turkel

No one picked up on my message of yesterday. Perhaps folks understood it as
a protest against R' Rackman's BD, but it realy wasn't. It is a serious
question re lawyering, and many other professions.

For example, may one serve as legal counsel to Planned Parenthood?

May one serve as a doctor for an individual seeking medical assitance in
order to pursue certain aveiros (that may produce a visit to Planned
Parenthood).

May one serve as a counsel for evolutionists in their battle to keep
creationism out of the curriculum.

I actually am noteh to say the answer is that one may do so, as long as one
does not serve pro-bono, but would like to see other opinions.

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

Several days (and five digests) ago, R. Daniel Schwartz asked the
following:

>   1.    How bad is it to like and enjoy the music of this season?  Do I
>place my soul in peril my doing so?

>    2.    What would be the prohibition, assuming there is one, of co-opting
>some of the nicer melodies and using in our own liturgy.

This query elicited some interesting musicological discussions, but
(except for a brief post by R. Mordechai Torczyner) almost no discussion
of the halakhic sources.  I make this observation because it illustrates
what I think is a general trend away from substantive discussion that
has overtaken Avodah, a list once dedicated to "high-level Torah
discussion."

The archives contain some discussion of the general problematic of
listening to music post-hurban.  Secular music has also been discussed
in the past.  Therefore I will focus on the second issue raised, namely,
incorporating non-Jewish music into the liturgy.  There is a wealth of
halakhic material on this question; I will try to summarize it briefly.

Sefer Hasidim (siman 238, if memory serves) prohibits using idolatrous
music in Jewish liturgy.  (Also prohibits singing Jewish music to put
children to sleep; the siman as a whole is striking.)  This is quoted by
Magen Avraham (Orah Hayyim, around siman 49, I think).

Rema (Orah Hayyim 53:25) states explicitly that one may discharge a
hazan for incorporating non-jewish music into the liturgy.  The nosei
kelim quote a teshuvah of the Bah which restricts this rule to music
that is specifically designated for idolatrous uses.

There are many, many teshuvot lamenting the use of non-Jewish music by
hazanim, with one fascinating exception.  I refer to the teshuvah in
Kerakh shel Romi by R. Yisrael Moshe Hazzan of Rome.  He argues at
length that there is no prohibition on adopting church melodies for use
in Jewish liturgy.  He further testifies that he saw a prominent rav in
Smyrna, R. Avraham ha-kohen Ariash, who would actually stand outside the
church and listen to their music for the express purpose of utilizing
the melodies for kaddish and kedushah.

Incidentally, lest this discussion reflect an Ashkenazo-centric bias, I
will note that some Sefardic posekim, including Hida, permit the use of
Arabic melodies, while others like R. Hayyim Pelaggi, prohibit it.  R.
Hayyim David Halevi has suggested that one can distinguish between
Christian melodies, which are avodah zarah, and Arabic ones, which are
not.  (He is also justifying the widespread borrowing of Arabic melodies
by Sefardic hazzanim.)

In short, following Rema as interpreted by Bah, Halakhah draws a
distinction between non-Jewish music generally and music specifically
composed for use in Christian worship.  So Bah would permit Bach, but
not Handel's Messiah.  And, as the hazzanim among us have already
discussed, much traditional nussah can be traced to non-Jewish sources.
All of this relates to incorporating such melodies into Jewish liturgy.

Regarding listening to secular music generally for general enjoyment,
please see the archives or, if people wish, I will briefly revisit that
subject in a future post.

Kol tuv and Hanukkah same'ah,

Eli

Briefly: wouldn't each case need a separate psak?

I have told my congreagants that when it comes to isssues liek abortions, EACH 
case must be paskened by a Rav - preferably a posik mumcheh in thes inyonim

My best guess is that the list can only delineate the salient and relevant 
halachic issues...

Rich Wolpoe 

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
<snip>

For example, may one serve as legal counsel to Planned Parenthood?

May one serve as a doctor for an individual seeking medical assitance in 
order to pursue certain aveiros (that may produce a visit to Planned 
Parenthood).

May one serve as a counsel for evolutionists in their battle to keep 
creationism out of the curriculum.

I actually am noteh to say the answer is that one may do so, as long as one 
does not serve pro-bono, but would like to see other opinions.

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

----- Original Message -----
From: Clark, Eli <clarke@HUGHESHUBBARD.COM>
To: avodah list <avodah@aishdas.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 09, 1999 9:20 AM
Subject: co-opting music -- halakhic sources (finally)


> This query elicited some interesting musicological discussions, but
> (except for a brief post by R. Mordechai Torczyner) almost no discussion
> of the halakhic sources.  I make this observation because it illustrates
> what I think is a general trend away from substantive discussion that
> has overtaken Avodah, a list once dedicated to "high-level Torah
> discussion."
>

A most pertinent observation. I believe the listowner decried this yesterday
as well.

> Regarding listening to secular music generally for general enjoyment,
> please see the archives or, if people wish, I will briefly revisit that
> subject in a future post.
>

An interesting revelation I had a few years back, when thumbing through the
Seridei Eish, was a teshuva, I do not remember which, where asked in the
wake of the Nurenberg laws, whether secular concerts may be held in a Shul.
The SE forbade such, with an interesting addendum en passant: that in
general, concerts (of classical music!) "ein ruach chachomim nocha meihem".

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

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


[ 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         ]