Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 214

Sunday, December 26 1999

• Re: Kollel and sustenance
• Re: School visits/inspections
• Re: Fundementalist Christians
• Re: a humble pixel
• Re: Avodah V4 #213
• Kollel
• Re: School visits/inspections
• RE: Rabbi Blaus' "Son's learning better than a father"
• SUMMARY OF SOURCES ON LIVING AGUNOTH
• homosexuality and animals
• RE: Slap in the Face
• Orthodoxy and return of land
• RE: Kollel and sustenance
• re: a humble pixel
• Beis Din
• Who gets to stay in Kollel
• Re: Slap in the Face
• Re: Orthodoxy and return of land

On 23 Dec 99, at 18:14, harry maryles wrote:

> I don't think the Vilna Gaon was in a Beis Hamedrash
> with 1000 students.

I think the Chazon Ish spent much of his time in Europe closeted in 
his own home learning.

Of course one could argue that the Gra and the Chazon Ish were 
the exceptions that proved the rule, but nevertheless I think the 
point is well taken.

-- Carl


Carl M. Sherer, Adv.
Silber, Schottenfels, Gerber & Sherer
Telephone 972-2-625-7751
Fax 972-2-625-0461
mailto:cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il
mailto:sherer@actcom.co.il

Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for my son,
Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.
Thank you very much.

On 23 Dec 99, at 16:49, Micha Berger wrote:

> David Finch <DFinchPC@aol.com> writes in v4n206:
> : Just display Rosenzweig's "Star of Redemption," and take bets on the result.
> 
> Well, if you play your cards right -- free tuition. I mean, how many schools
> would turn away a Kiruv case? What would happen to the kids r"l if they didn't
> take them? You just have to present it right. <grin>

I know you meant this in jest, but in many of the high schools here, 
being a native English speaker and being a baal tshuva are two 
major strikes against you.

-- Carl


Carl M. Sherer, Adv.
Silber, Schottenfels, Gerber & Sherer
Telephone 972-2-625-7751
Fax 972-2-625-0461
mailto:cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il
mailto:sherer@actcom.co.il

Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for my son,
Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.
Thank you very much.

On 24 Dec 99, at 7:41, harry maryles wrote:

> This is the way they read their biblical prophecy. 
> Required before the second coming: 1) the Jews must
> regain possesion of the Holy land (acheived in 1948 );
> 2)recapturing controll of Jerusalem (achieved in
> 1967); 3) building of Bayis Shlishi, which many of
> them are working very hard to acheive.
> 
> So, in light of that recent post forwarded to Avodah
> on why we are not doing anything about the matzav in
> Eretz Israel and the exhortation to protet loudly,

Are you suggesting that those of us who live here, and who live in 
Yerushalayim should pick up and leave because our being here 
happens to coincide with the Fundamentalist Christian agenda? 
What about the mitzva of Yishuv HaAretz? Are we to abandon it 
because what Hashem wants us to do happens to coincide with 
what the fundamentalist Christians (lehavdil elef alfei havdolos) 
want us to do?

-- Carl


Carl M. Sherer, Adv.
Silber, Schottenfels, Gerber & Sherer
Telephone 972-2-625-7751
Fax 972-2-625-0461
mailto:cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il
mailto:sherer@actcom.co.il

Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for my son,
Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.
Thank you very much.

In a message dated 12/25/99 10:19:39 PM US Central Standard Time, 
nwitty@ix.netcom.com writes:

<< My question is: "If that is a true statement of existence, what is it
 exactly that obligates Jews to obey the Torah?  It's all imaginary anyway." 
>>

Torah isn't imaginary. HaShem isn't imaginary. You are.

David Finch

Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 23:29:55 -0500
From: Gershon Dubin <gershon.dubin@juno.com>
Subject: Bes Din

From: "S Klagsbrun" <S.Klagsbrun@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
> Subject: Re: Avodah V4 #210

<<I would urge you  to cease perpetuating the myth that a just resolution
can be reached in adversarial situations through the use of Batai Dinim
anywhere in North America.   You may inadvertently cause someone to seek
justice in a Bais Din,  during the course of which a shtar birurin will
usually be signed,  permanently diminishing their ability to seek redress
through a court of law. I would think that as a G-d fearing person you
would not want this on your conscience on Yom Kippur.>>

Saying blanket loshon horah on all batei din and all of the dayanim who
comprise them, amounting to a serious number of talmidei chachamim,  is
an aveira I would not want on my conscience on Yom Kippur.

It is fairly well known that there are batei din that are problematic,
and Mr.. Schwartz,  being an attorney,  may have special knowledge of this
that the rest of us do not.  I assume Mr.. Klagsbrun has like knowledge,
and is not simply engaging in gratuitious sniping aka hotzo'as shem rah.

How wonderful it would be if they used this knowledge to work toward a
solution rather than dragging all batei din through the mud,  to what end
we can only speculate.

Gershon

The toeles of "dragging all batai dinim through the mud" is to awaken the
kehilos of North America to the fact that by and large the leadership of the
Orthodox world has abrogated it's responsibility to establish the courts of
law without which no civilization can flourish.

A very important lesson is to be learned from the fact that the Fate of
S'dom was sealed on the very day on which Lovan was installed as judge of
that often imitated culture. As long as the degenerates of S'dom were just
pack of Rishoim, the RSH"O could wait for their repentance. However, when
they hired Lovan, they were obviously trying to put the face of 'frumkiet'
on their rishus, protecting it from criticism in a blanket of long-bearded
respectability. This ultimate perversion of Emes HKB"H could not allow to
stand.
We too will rachmono litzlan be called to task for not demanding of our
leaders that they closet their fragile egos and sublimate their holy agendas
long enough to sit in one room, kipah srugah, up brim, down brim, straimal
and spodek, to establish a protocol under which all kehillos will accept and
abide by siruvim and charomim of all other Orthodox kehillos.
We are living in a time when Orthodox rabbi's find the courage to appear in
criminal courts asking for leniency in sentencing for convicted felons,
risking the chillul hashem caused by the (typically biased) media reports of
their statements, yet none have found the courage to publicly ridicule
Menashe HaSatan of Ungvar for his championship of the cause of the worst
abusers of the 'bais din' system.

It is not my fault that 'batai dinim' are mired in mud and worse, making the
sifting of the environment appear to be the movement of the 'btai dinim'
through mud, when in actuality it is the substance in which they freely
wallow that is being churned up around them.
Let us not forget that it is the establishment 'batai dinim' and their
inability/unwillingness to  clean their own house that has left the door
open for Rackman and Co. If we continue to turn a blind eye to the situation
and abstain from making these demands upon our leaders, are we not
accomplices to every b'eelas aishes ish which Rackman has sanctioned? Are we
not culpable in the wholesale creation of a population of Mamzairim
previously unimaginable?
Every generation gets the Rabonim it deserves. In the merit of our demanding
true torah leadership from the establishment, may we be zocheh to see it's
creation.

As for your suggestion that readers can speculate concerning my intentions,
a direct question as to my intentions would have been welcome. The
invitation to speculate borders on the encouragement to be choshaish
bichshairim.

Simcha Klagsbrun
------------------------------

With regard to Rav Dessler's attitude and a 1000 for one needed for
talmide chachamim, I think that his position was somewhat different than
described.  It was not that he thought that it required a beis midrash of
1000 to produce 1 talmid chacham.  Rather, if the focus of society is to
produce gdolim btorah, it can not allow any other avenue except torah
study or being a small tradesman, because otherwise the potential gadol
might choose other paths.  That is why he objected to setting up a
"seminary " for those who did not want to pursue full time study, as a
potential gadol might choose it. This means that many people who will not
be a gadol or even appropriate for full time study will spend their time
studying, and might be destroyed financially and even spiritually, but 
elef nikhnasin.
Rav Dessler's position is consistent, although cruel to the majority in
kollel.  His position leaves no room for any of the modifications
proposed, because the individual welfare of the learners is not the goal.
It is also the only fully articulated vision that I know of how and why a
society based on learning should run.  (If there are any other sourcres,
I would appreciate pointers).  I suspect, from the posts on this issue,
that most readers find this position unpalatable.  However, an alternative
consistent ideology that would support the current system is hard to
articulate.
 Meir Shinnar

In a message dated 12/26/99 9:29:54 AM US Central Standard Time, 
cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il writes:

<< 
 I know you meant this in jest, but in many of the high schools here, 
 being a native English speaker and being a baal tshuva are two 
 major strikes against you.
  >>

If the schools knew what there is to know, I'd have struck out long ago.

Actually, "Star of Redemption" would make useful (if slow-going) reading for 
any thoughtful Jew, especially someone who reads his Daf Yomi and puzzles his 
way through the standard codes and texts. Rosenzweig was a secular Jew with a 
mind like the medieval Acharonim. Whatever one might think of them, his views 
on the idea of Revelation reveal an extraordinarily deep, tortured, soulful 
belief in HaShem. He had real Kavana, and cannot be compared to other modern 
Jewish abstractionists whose works are (sometimes unfairly) condemned as 
"academic," "liberal," or "something the Reform would read." 

Why do so many observant Jews shun modern scholarly works on Jewish 
religiosity? I'm thinking of Isadore Twersky, Marvin Fox, Menachem Kellner, 
Gershom Scholem, Benzion Netanyahu, etc., all of whom understand and accept 
Orthodoxy. (I'm not thinking of Jacob Neusner, although personally I'd 
include him in that group.) Nothing in these books really undermines 
frumkeit. The intellectual challenges they pose are quite exciting. Is it 
because these authors assume the reader is somewhat knowledgeable about 
history, secular and X-tian philosophy, etc.? Is it because the authors ask 
too many of the wrong questions? Is it because they compete intellectually in 
the secular marketplace?

One more point: In his shiur on Bava Metzia, RYGB introduced us to Rabbi 
Isaac Herzog's "The Main Institutions of Jewish Law." It's a wonderful guide, 
obviously very learned, supremely respectful of Talmudic reasoning. It also 
uses the English common law as a template to translate Talmudic principles on 
money, property, possession, partnership, etc., into concepts that can be 
taken apart and analyzed pragmatically. Does Rabbi Herzog's approach make his 
work verboten as well? 

These issues trouble me. I would welcome any guidance any of you might offer.

David Finch 

(I'm back to normal writing--thanks to all who wrote 
me while I was preparing my paper)

I thank Rabbi Blau for his erudite presentation on Talmud 
Torah. However while I basically agree with his conclusions
(after all they are straight from the Gemarrah) I believe they
have to be modified. Roughly speaking we must distinguish
---father retains nothing, son retains-->son is preferred
---father is slow, son is fast-------------->father is preferred
In other words The gemarrah Rabbi Blau cited ONLY holds
if one party can't learn anything; otherwise there is law that
someone else takes precedence (I believe this destroys the
appeal made but the money was already collected)

Rather than give a lengthy discource let me just cite sources.
There is a "famous" contradiction between the Rambam
Theft and Losses (Chap 14 1 or 2) and Talmud Torah
regarding preference in returning a lost article to your father
or teacher first. The bottom line (see the KSF MISHNH) is
that if the teacher is his main teacher then his teacher takes
precedence (if his father is an ignormous) but his father
takes precedence if he is learned (even if he is not AS learned
as his teacher).

In other words I understand the resolution of the contradiction
of "better than" to be "qualitatively better than" as when one
can learn and one cant'--but if both can learn and one is 
better it does not apply (The KSF MISHNAH is long and
confusing so maybe someone has a different take on it).

I would apply the same concept here.

Incidentally in passing I mention that one of the arguments against
Eugenics (lhavdil) is that it is improper for a society to go around
"measuring everybody" all the time. The concept I proposed of
"creating priorties only when one can't retain" would avoid this
problem.

Russell Hendel; http://www.shamash.org/rashi/
________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

Some of the questions I am received on the Living AGUNOTH
(when the brother in law refuses a Yibum or when the husband
refuses a get) are asking me for sources WHICH I ALREADY
cited. So let me summarize what has transpired tillnow. I will
be happy to continue the thread if asked something new

1) I already emphasized that when a get/yibum is refused we
ALL agree that verbal persuasion methods should be 
employed first (Husband should be asked to give the get...)

2) Similarly we ALL agree that to begin with the woman can
be encouraged to eg pray that he give the get or pray
that she should be "saved" from this humiliating situation.

3) The only controversy arises when ALL ELSE HAS FAILED
And the women is suffering greatly with open bitterness

4) Under such circumstances I recommended explicitly 
advising the women to pray for the man's death (brother in
law or husband).  I emphasize that I only advocate this after
--all verbal means have failed
--other methods of prayer do not satisfy her

5) The sources for this are on the Sifrah/Sifray
----REAY--Shishi-vs CI TAYSAY (worker law)
The double language (DON"T CALL ON GOD, DO
CALL ON GOD) clearly states that it is PERMISSABLE
to pray against people who default on loans or wages

6) A further source is the verse "don't anguish a widow"
in Mishpatim (See sifray). It appears that the sifrah
in Devarim is the basis for the permissability of the
prayers mentioned in mishpatim.

7) To answer Carl;s questions such prayers should
be allowed ON ANY INCIDENT similar to witholding
wages, loan payments, or anguishing widows. ALL
I am saying is that a witheld get should not be
INFERIOR to a WITHELD loan or wages (How can
Carl or anyone disagree with that?!--I concede that
I don't know all cases that such prayers are allowed
but that is irrelevant)

8) To answer Richards question (and Carls)---the person
praying is not JUDGING the man rather she is praying FOR
JUDGEMENT!!

Ultimately it is God who is judging the man. To further
answer Carl's question this woman has been
---deprived of legal aid
---deprived of basic rights of marriage
It is not OUR right to tell he not to pray also. Furthermore
to prohibit her from praying for death would be to violate
an EXPLICIT biblical permission.


9) Finally any statements in Rishonim or acharonim about
not encouraging certain types of hostile prayer DO NOT
IN ANY CASE apply to the cases the Bible enumerated
above (loan default, withold wages). Consequently we
are not justified in overriding something explicitly allowed


In conclusion I would urge Richard and carl to read what
I said before citing me out of context. Since this thread
went on for several postings perhaps people forgot what
I said....I have therefore summarized everything clearly
above and indicated exactly where we seem to be
disagreeing. I hope this is helpful

Russell Hendel; http://www.shamash.org/rashi/
________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

I have heard that there is an increased incidence of homosexuality amongst
animals in areas where human homosexuals live.  Can anyone find me a source 
for this. This reminds me of the medrash that states that in Sodom, even the 
animals
engaged in homosexuality.   Ozzie Orbach

> Yes. That "returning" land causes lives to be lost instead of
> saving them is not a demonstable point,

And once it *is* demonstratable, countless lives will have been lost.

> otherwise Rabbis So;oveitchik and ylctv"a Yosef
> would not have held that "returning" land is permissible.

In exchange for a *true* peace.

And there is *no* evidence that the PA is interested in such a peace.

> > I remember a Gemara that basically says we don't have to be
> concerned with
> > how they (non-Jews, but I suspect the same ruling applies to
> non-Observant)
> > mis-interpret Torah teachings.
> >
>
> I do not think either statement is correct.

Sorry -- my mistake. It's Rashi on Bereshis 1:26 -- Na'aseh Adam.

> What is this business of Kedushas har Ha'Bayis? Is it because
> of the issur of Me'ilah?

The *dirt* isn't the question -- the *artifacts* from the eras of Bayis
Rishon/Sheni are what people are upset about.

Isn't it *possible* that those kelim *do* have kedusha?

Akiva



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

<< I believe it is not for Orthodox Jewry to concern itself with the "return"
 of land to the Arabs. Certainly not if that concern leads the non-Orthodox
 to the slightest aversion to Torah Judaism. >>

If kedushat ha'aretz, yishuv ha'aretz, lo techaneim, etc. are not our 
concern, then what is?  Aside from the technical halachic parameters must we 
be blind to the political meaning that the Old City and other areas have to 
to our national identity?  

There is an article in ENCOUNTER (by William Low) which tries to show (IMO
successfully) that the yeshiva system does *not* produce gedolim.

Akiva

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

Noah Witty asks <<<If that is a true statement of existence, what is it
exactly that obligates Jews to obey the Torah?  It's all imaginary
anyway. >>>

Remember Relativity?

Existence is all imaginary, but only relative to HaShem. Relative to
ourselves, existence is very real, and we are obligated to relate to
everything as if it were real. This is similar to how time is real for
us, even though Hashem is outside of it.

Akiva Miller

________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

A poster recently wrote <<< As for the fact that the state of 'botai din'
in general is one of complete perversion, corruption, ineptness and often
well intentioned naiveté, d'vorim hayiduim b'alma are generally exempt
from the rules of lashon harah. >>>

How did these things get to be "d'vorim hayiduim b'alma"?

Somehow, despite fear of lawsuits and such, word gets out to the public
that Kashrus Hashgacha ABC is unreliable, with loads of stories to back
it up, whereas Hechsher XYZ is very reliable, with stories to back it up.
Initially, we take both stories with the appropriate salt, but as the
years go on and the stories add up, reputations are built or destroyed,
and - hopefully - deservedly so.

That is NOT what is happening with the Beis Din situation. Instead,
people are claiming that ALL Batei Din in general are corrupt. People
need to find a way to get these stories out to the public. I invite you
all to spread such stories with the same zeal as you do regarding
kashrus, and then perhaps we will succeed in educating the public as to
who is honest and who is corrupt, as has been done in the kashrus field.

That poster continued, <<< If one were to feel the (lemming-like) need to
hold open some doubt as to the severity of this situation, one should do
so for themselves, not build fantastic images of available justice to be
shared with unfortunate litigants inexperienced enough in real-world
events to understand the nature of these fantasies. >>>

Count me in as one of your naive lemmings. WHAT ELSE DO YOU EXPECT? You
have experienced the horror stories, but I have not. If I ever need to go
to a Beis Din for something, I would go to one recommended by my rav, or
one led by some well-known rav/posek. What other options would I have?

Akiva Miller

________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

What I would like to know (and in Arizona I don't meet a large enough
sampleof Kollel guys to know the answer) is how many Kollel guys would
have a strong desire to stay in Kollel if there was no social pressure
to do so?  Not that we can really measure this in reality, but in
principle I suspect that it would be a much smaller number than are
staying now.  In which case, the real problem is not how to support the
huge numbers in Kollel, but rather, how to make sure the people who stay
are their for the right reasons.

(I am not saying that there shouldn't be social pressure to learn in
Yeshiva, just that there shouldn't be pressure to stay there permanently.)

-- 
Daniel M. Israel
<daniel@cfd.ame.arizona.edu>
University of Arizona
Tucson, AZ

----- Original Message -----
From: Akiva Atwood <atwood@netvision.net.il>
To: <avodah@aishdas.org>
Sent: Sunday, December 26, 1999 11:59 AM
Subject: RE: Slap in the Face


> > Yes. That "returning" land causes lives to be lost instead of
> > saving them is not a demonstable point,
>
> And once it *is* demonstratable, countless lives will have been lost.
>
> > otherwise Rabbis So;oveitchik and ylctv"a Yosef
> > would not have held that "returning" land is permissible.
>
> In exchange for a *true* peace.
>

I do not believe that was or is part of the basis for their position. There
is no way to know if a peace is true or not when you sign the dotted line.
One is permitted to risk an operation that is experimental and potentially
fatal if it may save the patient's life (a famous teshuva by R' Chaim Ozer
Grodzhenski in the Achiezer). Hu ha'din b'nidon didan.

> And there is *no* evidence that the PA is interested in such a peace.
>
> > > I remember a Gemara that basically says we don't have to be
> > concerned with
> > > how they (non-Jews, but I suspect the same ruling applies to
> > non-Observant)
> > > mis-interpret Torah teachings.
> > >
> >
> > I do not think either statement is correct.
>
> Sorry -- my mistake. It's Rashi on Bereshis 1:26 -- Na'aseh Adam.
>

Indeed, Rashi is not relevant to our discussion. In fact, when the Shiv'im
Zekeinim translated that pasuk for Ptolmey they changed that pasuk, as well
as countless others (OK, they are countable). (I think we have noted this as
precedent for Artscroll :-) .) The reason that in Lashon Ha'Kodesh that
pasuk is written the way it is, is because of the overriding value of
teaching the yesodos that Chazal and the Meforshim note there.

> > What is this business of Kedushas har Ha'Bayis? Is it because
> > of the issur of Me'ilah?
>
> The *dirt* isn't the question -- the *artifacts* from the eras of Bayis
> Rishon/Sheni are what people are upset about.
>
> Isn't it *possible* that those kelim *do* have kedusha?
>

Actually, I belive the sugya in Nedarim 54 states that all kelim in the Beis
Ha'Mikdash are subject to the halacha of "ba'u ba peritzim va'yechaleluha",
i.e., unlike the actual karka of the HhB they lose their kedusha when seized
by Goyim. So, no.

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

----- Original Message -----
From: <C1A1Brown@aol.com>
To: <avodah@aishdas.org>
Sent: Sunday, December 26, 1999 12:04 PM
Subject: Orthodoxy and return of land


> << I believe it is not for Orthodox Jewry to concern itself with the
"return"
>  of land to the Arabs. Certainly not if that concern leads the
non-Orthodox
>  to the slightest aversion to Torah Judaism. >>
>
> If kedushat ha'aretz, yishuv ha'aretz, lo techaneim, etc. are not our
> concern, then what is?  Aside from the technical halachic parameters must
we
> be blind to the political meaning that the Old City and other areas have
to
> to our national identity?
>

Of course they are our concern.

The Galil is just as kadosh as Yehuda v'Shomron.

(Note: I am not opposed to settling Yv'S, I am merely responding to my
borther in law's query.)

I am curious as to how you would like to apply "Lo Techaneim" here. They are
choneh already. Can you prove that granting them the inevitable statehood
enhances the extant chanayah ba'karka to the extent that it would constitute
an additional prohibition? If anything, since the State of Israel has no
intention of "transferring" its Arab population, it probably would diminish
its "aveirah" of Lo Techaneim" by relinquishing the areas of Arab population
so that the State would not be in the position of having Goyim "tachas
yadam" and allowing their continued residence.

(I believe that there are opinions that Moslems fulfill the parameters of
Ger Toshav anyway, although I do not think I agree.)

As to the Old City, so far as I know, this was not an Old City issue but a
Har ha'Bayis issue. Since the '67 war the State of Israel has consistently
refrained from asserting its authority over the HhB. Ma ha'yom me'yomayim?

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         ]