Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 298

Sunday, January 16 2000

• Re: Who was Rabbi Kehati
• Re: MO and the Rav
• RE: Modern Orthodox narrow mindness
• Re: Talking in Shul - another issue
• Re: intolerance
• Internet and Issur Histaklus Binashim
• Talking in shul
• re: Internet and Issur Histaklus Binashim
• re: Who was Rabbi Kahati?
• Charedi vs. MO
• Re: Avodah V4 #297
• re: mixed seating at weddings
• MO vs. Chareidi
• MO vs. Chareidi
• Histaklus benashim (was: mixed seating)
• Histaklus benashim (was: mixed seating)
• Mixed seating
• Mixed seating
• re: Rabbi vs. Dr. Lamm
• Re: Mixed seating
• re: mixed seating at weddings

Kehati wrote his peyrush on mishnayot during the time he worked as a
bank clerk (teller ?) at Bank Mizrachi in Jerusalem.

Josh

--- "Zuckerman, Jeffrey I." <JZuckerman@CM-P.COM>

> 	Finally, I think it is inappropriate to refer to
> Rabbi Lamm, in
> postings to Avodah, as Dr. Lamm.  Particularly
> considering how generously
> some on this list award <<R>>'s, some might infer
> (mistakenly, I presume)
> that referring to Rabbi Lamm without using the title
> <<Rabbi>> is intended
> to deligitimize him or his views.

I refer to Dr. Lamm as "Dr." because I believe that is
his preference.(Perhaps he feels that in hisrole as
President of a major university that title suits that
purpose better.)  I'm not 100% sure of this but I seem
to recll this anecdotally. I am a firm believer in
reffering to people they want to be reffered to. If I
am wrong about this then I will change my honorific
towards him to whatever is shown to be most
appropraite.  

Anyone who has read my posts regarding Rabbi Dr. Lamm
must know that I am one of his greatest defenders.

Also, I think it should be clarified that "R" in front
or someone's name does not automaticly confer Rabbinic
ordination. Nor does it automaticly mean Rabbi. Common
parlance utilizes the word "Reb", taken from Yiddish,
to mean Mr., not Rabbi.  The Letter "R" before a name
can, therefore, mean either Reb (Mr.) or Rabbi or Rav.

RHM
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com

--- Akiva Atwood <atwood@netvision.net.il> wrote:
> > Look, if I believe that my position is the correct
> one
> > I am entitled to argue in favor of it's acceptence
> by
> > all, with everythying that is availabe at my
> disposal
> > to TRY and prove my point. If I am seen to be
> wrong by
> > others, they should try and convince me otherwise,
> > including using the "ad absurdum" argument against
> me.
> > It's called debate.
> 
> I would disagree that "ad absurdum" has any place in
> an intellectual
> discussion.
> 
> Debate is about trying to prove one's position, not
> about reaching a greater
> understanding of Emes.

You wouldn't agree that taking an opponents view to
it's absurd conclusion is a valid step towards
rebuttal of your opponents view?

HM
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com

R' Steve Katz wrote:
>  It would be our pleasure to have you visit with us for a Shabbos if you 
> really want to hear some serious talking in shul.

I was hoping my post on this topic would be ignored; immediately after 
sending it, I re-read it and thought it sounded arrogant.

Given that someone did read it, I'll try to explain my thoughts on this. R' 
Micha and others have been discussing the question of how it is that people 
(including those discussing the problem) can be lured into speaking in shul, 
given the importance of Kevod Beis haKenesses.

My answer is that some of this talking may be attributed to a general lack of 
restraint. The link to New York was only meant to explain my own anecdotal 
experience. The same may be true in Chicago, and elsewhere.

There is no question that certain societies encourage that sort of "freedom," 
under the banner of "lack of pretense" and "real people." These are the same 
societies which laugh at the Victorian pretense of morality, and the old 
European manners. However, there is something to be said for restraint, at 
the least when it can help in this sphere. If we focus less on shul, and more 
on general restraint, that may help alleviate the problem.

Is that better?
Mordechai
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------
Cong. Ohave Shalom, YI of Pawtucket, RI http://members.tripod.com/~ohave
HaMakor! http://www.aishdas.org/hamakor Mareh Mekomos Reference Library
WEBSHAS! http://www.aishdas.org/webshas Indexing the Talmud, Daf by Daf
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------

In a message dated 1/16/00 4:42:18 PM Eastern Standard Time,
Harry Maryles writes:
<< As I indicated earlier everyone has a right to be
 Noheg any Chumra they want, as long as they don't try
 and IMPOSE their Chumra on everyone else.  As fior my
 "Portrayl" I was simply using the "ad absurtum" method
 of arguing the incorrectness of their position, all
 the while agreeing to their right to hold it.  
  Look, if I believe that my position is the correct one
 I am entitled to argue in favor of it's acceptence by
 all, with everythying that is availabe at my disposal
 to TRY and prove my point. If I am seen to be wrong by
 others, they should try and convince me otherwise,
 including using the "ad absurdum" argument against me.
 It's called debate. >>
In what way are they trying to imose it on you? They are merely stating their 
opinion which they believe to be correct, and therefore all who respect their 
opinion should follow them. If you don't respect their opinion don't listen. 
Furthermore, they are primarily speaking to their communities.
Also, my complaint was not that you were trying to prove your point. You are 
entitled to do that any way you wish (although I personally feel that the way 
you portrayed them is insulting, unnecessary, and that you would be upset if 
somoene portrayed your community in such a manner). My complaint was that you 
are so sure of the correctness of your opinion, that you don't attempt to 
understand that there may be another perspective on the matter. And that 
seems to me to be intolerant and narrow minded.  

> Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 12:45:55 -0800 (PST)
> From: Harry Maryles <hmaryles@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: Internet and Issur Histaklus Binashim 

First of all, Reb Harry,  allow me to wish you mazal tov and much nachas
from this kallah and from all your children.

<<They can just lock trhemselves up in the closet for that matter and
stare at the clothes on the Hangers.  Of course that might give some
people Hirhurim, too.>>

	'pears to me that osur lehistakel bevigdei tziv'onim shel isha is not a
modern day chumra.  Bottom line,  what causes hirhur is osur lehalacha,
not lechumra.

Gershon

> 
> > Regarding the issue of talking in shul - I wonder whether there isn't a
> > contributing factor which has little to do with the shul, and more to do with
> > the people involved.
> >
> > As someone who spent 24 years in various shuls on Long Island (and New Jersey
> > for a year) I have seen plenty of talking in Shul. For the last 2 1/2 years
> > in Rhode Island, though, I have seen comparatively little.
> >
> > At the same time, I have also noticed that people outside of the New York
> > area have less of a tendency to interrupt others in mid-sentence, and even
> > less of a tendency toward slanderous gossip. As a matter of fact, people
> > speak less, in general.
> > Mordechai Torczyner
> > Cong. Ohave Shalom, YI of Pawtucket, RI http://members.tripod.com/~ohave
> > HaMakor! http://www.aishdas.org/hamakor Mareh Mekomos Reference Library
> > WEBSHAS! http://www.aishdas.org/webshas Indexing the Talmud, Daf by Daf
> 
I think Rabbi Torczyner is pretty much right.  It may be more big city 
vs. smaller area.  My shul is one where people do shmuz a bit, but when I 
visited NY last year, I had trouble davening due to the excessive 
talking. 

I don't think it is an issue of famliarity since even in  NY on weekdays 
there is only minimal talking compared to shabbos.  (Of course I would 
where I daven I would love not to hear the ususal question being asked 
towards the end of Psuzke Dzimra - Do you see anyone else coming?)

I have also seen a lot of talking in a large shul in LA. (Much of it was 
in Hungrian.  is there a heter to shmuz in shul in Hungarian:-)

Harry

For those of you that missed it, an editorial in the English Yated Neeman
addressed the question "what is wrong with the Internet" with a slightly
different emphasis:

<start quote>

Many people mistakenly believe that the main danger is from seeing
prohibited sights or reading prohibited material  . . .

The Internet is not a neutral technology.  It carries with it a message
and a temptation. According to the New York Times (of January 9, 2000,
which we downloaded from the Internet under the guidelines of the beis din),
"Like much of America's influence on the world, the Internet lies in the
arena of what Joseph Nye, dean of Harvard U.'s Kennedy School of
Government terms 'soft power.'  It's like rock 'n' roll or American movies,
which earn lots of money, to be sure, but mainly influence other nations by
offering an irresistible alternative culture."

The Internet today, with its glitz and frenetic change, carries with it,
promotes, and insinuates values such as unbridled consumption, quick
gratification of every desire, disrespect for authority, rootlessness,
and probably many more such destructive principles that are all the
more dangerous because most people are not aware of them and do not
set up defenses against them  . . . The continual pressure that the Internet
exerts is on the most sensitive and precious possession that we own: the
Jewish Heart  . . .  Any assault on it is truly a "terrible danger, c"v, to
kedushas Yisroel and to generational continuity."

<close quote>

It seems that there is very much a McLuhanesque implication
here that the medium is the message, and not a very wholesome
message at that.    Note the interesting parenthetical mention by the
writer that Yated itself uses the Internet in a way that has been
halachically approved by the special beis din established for
Internet issues (e.g., when it downloaded the NYTimes article).

Comments anyone?

Kol tuv,
Shlomo Godick

I can only sketch a brief, incomplete picture from the
bits and pieces I remember hearing about this impressive
man.

Rav Pinchas Kahati z"l was a teller at one of the branches of Bank
Mizrahi in Yerushalayim.  I think his perush started out as stencils
or mimeographed handouts published weekly for his mishna shiur.
I am pretty sure he was a Yekke (one certainly gets that impression
from reading his thorough explanations).

At one point Bank Mizrahi gave him some time off (at paid salary) to
publish his collected perushim as a full-fledged 12-volume mishnah
commentary.  When his commentary appeared it pre-empted just
about every other modern mishna commentary that had appeared
till then.  He was niftar a while back, I believe in the seventies.

Recently a beautiful edition of the Kahati mishnaos has been published
featuring the commentaries of the Rav miBertinoro (known as "the
Bartinura") and Kahati on the same page.   We just purchased it for
our beis medrash.

Kol tuv,
Shlomo Godick

>Reading letters by Rav Kook ZT"L and some of the posts in
>the latest issues of Avodah, and seeing the ban on Internet
>has brought fwd, IMHO one of the basic true differences
>between so-called Chareidi and Dati Leumi:  Yirah vs. Ahava.

Hmm, where does that leave Chassidim?  Certainly their focus seems to be
Ahava (and chesed over g'vurah).

In my naive brain: charedi implies black hats & coats, beards, tons of
children; MO implies knitted kippa, short or no beards, regular clothes,
fewer children.  Chassidim _would_ be a subset of Charedi under this
lifestyle definition.

Confusedly yours,

Eric

Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 22:40:28 +0200
From: D & E-H Bannett <dbnet@barak-online.net>
Subject: Re: Mixed Seating

R' Steve Katz wrote:
Friends who are parents of Chaim Berliners have told me that they had to
make their kid's chasanah separate seating because if not the Rosh
HaYeshiva would not come. Period.


I too heard of this happening to a friend.  But, in my story, the boy's
father knew the
Rosh Yeshiva from when they were in yeshiva together.

He told his son to tell the Rosh Yeshiva that he agreed to have separate
seating if at
the Rosh Yeshiva's wedding there was separate seating.

He  had mixed seating and the Rosh Yeshiva came.

Who says that times haven't changed?

D.

At the Yeshiva's annual dinner, the 'rule' is that alumni must sit seperate,
everyone else may sit mixed. Rav Ahron Shlit"a was misader kiddushin at our
chupah and never asked about the seating arrangements. (Our wedding was
mixed, as any self respecting litvish family would do, but we did have
tables set aside for rabbonim and others who we knew would be more
comfortable sitting seperate.) IMNSHO any RY has the right to set standards
for his talmidim so long as he does not try to impose them on the rest of
the world.
    If any RY can be upheld as an example of a ohaiv shalom v'rodaif shalom,
it is Rav Ahron. I hope we will all be careful not to try and twist the
standards he sets within the Yeshiva into proof of his being part of a 'we'
and 'them' mentality. Anyone who has dealt with him can tell you that he is
truely "mitalmidav shel Ahron" (Avos 1:12).

Simcha Klagsbrun

In response to my question, "  What is the specific issur in men watching
women dancing, where the  dancing is not of an erotic type?", Yitzchok
Zirkind answered, "When women dance in front of men, they cause them to
have erotic thoughts.  Singing often accompanies the dancing, in which
case the men would be transgressing the prohibition of hearing a female
voice."  He then quotes the Ben Ish Chai that "it is forbidden for women
to dance by themselves in the presence of men...contemporary authorities
strongly support this view, stating unequivocally that such activity is
not permitted, even for the Mitzvah of gladdening a bride and groom."

Since my question specified that the dancing was not of an erotic type
(and certainly the typical dancing at a frum chasuna is not), the
question still remains: what is the source for the issur? As for the Ben
Ish Chai, one strongly suspects that he was referring to a far different
type of dancing, where the problem of hirhur was real, since in his day
the type of dancing taking place now didn't exist. It should also be
noted that the Ben Ish Chai does not state that men may not witness the
dancing. What he says it that women are prohibited from dancing.  He
doesn't (at least in the quotation cited by RYZ) say that all men are
obligated to leave when such dancing takes place.

RYZ also stated, "Shulchan HaEzer 9:2 and Shevet Mussar 24 add that a
woman may not participate 
in a dance group if there is a male musician involved."

I admit my am ha'aretz status. I am unaware of the identities of these
renowned poskim. But if there is an analogy to be made between them and
the Ben Ish Chai, then just as at virtually all weddings, whether ba'alei
batim with mixed seating, Yeshivish with a mechitzah, or chasidish with
separate rooms, no one accepts the psak of the Shulchan Haezer and the
Shevet Mussar, so too the psak of the Ben Ish Chai may have gained far
from universal acceptance.

In response to my question from the Mishna in Taanis about Yom Kippur and
Tu b'Av, when "bnos Yerushalayim  yotzos v'cholos bakramim," the response
was from Kitov's Sfer HaToda'ah: "Since those two days were days of
purification from sin, the earlier generations did not hesitate also to
regard them as days of festivity and dancing for the daughters of Israel.
 On these days the daughters used to go 
outside the city and dance in the vineyards, and there was no
apprehension lest they breach the fence of chastity and modesty.  The
character of the days as days of purification from transgression was in
itself regarded as a safeguard that none would utilize them to commit
misdeeds."

Aside from the fact that the author is not a posek, the terutz is not
very good, either. (a) Meila Yom Kippur, but since when is Tu b'Av a "day
of purification from sin"? The g'mara in Bava Basra lists six reasons for
celebration; none deal with purification from sin.  In fact, the sugya
states, "bishlama Yom Hakipurim yom slicha um'chila, ela chamisha asar
b'Av mai?" (b) If the mere sight of dancing females suffices to cause men
to have erotic thoughts, then what difference does it make if the women
do not "breach the fence of chastity"?  And if it is the type of dancing
that is the problem, then hadra kushyun l'duchta: what is the issur of
men seeing the kind of dancing that takes place at frum weddings?  (c)
Parenthetically, R.E. Kitov's characterization of these days as "days of
festivity and dancing for the daughters of Israel. On these days (they)
used to go outside the city and dance in the vineyards" is disingenuous.
They weren't dancing in celebration. They were seeking to attract a
husband. 

Furthermore, if there is an issur of men watching women dance, how come
not one rishon nor one of the g'dolei ha'achronim (as far as my limited
knowledge extends) comments on the mishna in Ta'anis, ad shebo R.E. Kitov
and clarified it?

As for the possibility of the women singing, I have never heard them at
the non-mechitza weddings I've attended, and my wife assures me that they
don't sing behind the mechitza, either.

Sadya N. Targum
 


________________________________________________________________
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.

> Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 14:31:22 EST
> From: C1A1Brown@aol.com
> Subject: Re: MO vs Chareidi

<<am I the only one who is wondering what is the point of these
conversations? >>

	No you aren't;  they really are inappropriate.  "es past nisht far unz"

Gershon

> Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 14:31:22 EST
> From: C1A1Brown@aol.com
> Subject: Re: MO vs Chareidi

<<am I the only one who is wondering what is the point of these
conversations? >>

	No you aren't;  they really are inappropriate.  "es past nisht far unz"

Gershon

> Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 16:16:42 -0500 (EST)
> From: Meir Shinnar <shinname@UMDNJ.EDU>
> Subject: Mixed seating
 
<<R. Zirkind wrote that men watching women dance is assur.  Source?>>

	My daughter happened to have read this part of the digest and I will
answer your question with her reaction:  "For this he needs a source??" 
Hamefursamos einan tzrichos lerayoh.  

	Rav Moshe,  in his teshuva on mechitzos,  says that this is not the
purpose of mechitzos,  but *it goes without saying*  that histaklus
benashim is osur.  And he is referring to women who come to shul and
stand there,  not women who are dancing.

	If you are not happy with this answer,  you may look up the teshuva and
his mar'eh mekomos,  first chelek Orach Chaim.

	This,  of course has absolutely nothing to do with mixed seating, which
why I changed the topic.

Gershon

> Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 16:16:42 -0500 (EST)
> From: Meir Shinnar <shinname@UMDNJ.EDU>
> Subject: Mixed seating
 
<<R. Zirkind wrote that men watching women dance is assur.  Source?>>

	My daughter happened to have read this part of the digest and I will
answer your question with her reaction:  "For this he needs a source??" 
Hamefursamos einan tzrichos lerayoh.  

	Rav Moshe,  in his teshuva on mechitzos,  says that this is not the
purpose of mechitzos,  but *it goes without saying*  that histaklus
benashim is osur.  And he is referring to women who come to shul and
stand there,  not women who are dancing.

	If you are not happy with this answer,  you may look up the teshuva and
his mar'eh mekomos,  first chelek Orach Chaim.

	This,  of course has absolutely nothing to do with mixed seating, which
why I changed the topic.

Gershon

> Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 22:40:28 +0200
> From: D & E-H Bannett <dbnet@barak-online.net>
> Subject: Re: Mixed Seating

<<R' Steve Katz wrote:
> Friends who are parents of Chaim Berliners have told me that they had
to
> make their kid's chasanah separate seating because if not the Rosh
HaYeshiva would not come. Period.>>

 
<<I too heard of this happening to a friend.  But, in my story, the boy's
father knew the Rosh Yeshiva from when they were in yeshiva together.  He
told his son to tell the Rosh Yeshiva that he agreed to have separate
seating if at the Rosh Yeshiva's wedding there was separate seating. He 
had mixed seating and the Rosh Yeshiva came.?  Who says that times
haven't changed?>>

	I am truly at a loss to understand the moral of this story.  I see two
options:

	1.  The Rosh Yeshiva was embarrassed by his hypocrisy into allowing
mixed seating for the wedding.

	2.  The Rosh Yeshiva decided to allow the mixed seating in deference to
the father's strong feelings.

If (1), what's the point of the story-leshon harah?
If (2) , what's the point of the story-that the Rosh Yeshiva is a mentch?

This thread, too,  is becoming quite tiresome.

Gershon

> Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 22:40:28 +0200
> From: D & E-H Bannett <dbnet@barak-online.net>
> Subject: Re: Mixed Seating

<<R' Steve Katz wrote:
> Friends who are parents of Chaim Berliners have told me that they had
to
> make their kid's chasanah separate seating because if not the Rosh
HaYeshiva would not come. Period.>>

 
<<I too heard of this happening to a friend.  But, in my story, the boy's
father knew the Rosh Yeshiva from when they were in yeshiva together.  He
told his son to tell the Rosh Yeshiva that he agreed to have separate
seating if at the Rosh Yeshiva's wedding there was separate seating. He 
had mixed seating and the Rosh Yeshiva came.?  Who says that times
haven't changed?>>

	I am truly at a loss to understand the moral of this story.  I see two
options:

	1.  The Rosh Yeshiva was embarrassed by his hypocrisy into allowing
mixed seating for the wedding.

	2.  The Rosh Yeshiva decided to allow the mixed seating in deference to
the father's strong feelings.

If (1), what's the point of the story-leshon harah?
If (2) , what's the point of the story-that the Rosh Yeshiva is a mentch?

This thread, too,  is becoming quite tiresome.

Gershon

The objection to Avodah members referring to YU's president as Dr. Lamm,
rather than Rabbi Lamm, is misdirected.  Yesterday's mail brought a copy
of Yeshiva University Review, in which there are many references to Dr.
Lamm, but not one single mention of Rabbi Lamm--not even in a paragraph
about his writing a d'var Torah in the Kollel publication. R'tzono shel
Adam kvodo, and this is obviously his ratzon.
Elazar M. Teitz
________________________________________________________________
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 believe it is a pasuk in the Torah:

Lo sasuru acharei... eineichem.

Parashas Shelach.


On Sun, 16 Jan 2000, Meir Shinnar wrote:

> 	R Zirkind wrote that men watching women dance is assur.  Source?
>  Mehitzot at nonhasidic weddings are very recent.
> Meir Shinnar
> 
> 

YGB

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

The SA EH 21 says one is not allowed to walk behind a woman.

Lomadnu dancing me'kal va'chomer.

On Mon, 17 Jan 2000, sadya n targum wrote:

> Since my question specified that the dancing was not of an erotic type
> (and certainly the typical dancing at a frum chasuna is not), the
> question still remains: what is the source for the issur? As for the Ben
> Ish Chai, one strongly suspects that he was referring to a far different
> type of dancing, where the problem of hirhur was real, since in his day
> the type of dancing taking place now didn't exist. It should also be
> noted that the Ben Ish Chai does not state that men may not witness the
> dancing. What he says it that women are prohibited from dancing.  He
> doesn't (at least in the quotation cited by RYZ) say that all men are
> obligated to leave when such dancing takes place. 
> 

YGB

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

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


[ 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         ]