Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 322

Tuesday, January 25 2000

• Re: Bet Yosef meat and lifnei iver
• Re: Bet Yosef Wine
• RE: Histaklus BaNashim
• RE: Histaklus etc
• Re: Torah hi,
• Mach'oh
• Re[3]: Mendelsohn
• Re: Histaklus etc
• RE: Bet Yosef Wine
• Re: Histaklus etc
• MO vs RW
• Torah hi
• Hatzolo, was Mendelsohn
• RE: Avodah V4 #307
• Re: Mendelsohn
• Re: Hatzolo, was Mendelsohn
• Re: MO vs RW
• Re: Torah hi
• Re[2]: Mendelsohn
• Re: Avodah V4 #321
• Histalkus BeNashim
• MO, RW
• RE: Avodah V4 #321
• Re[2]: Avodah V4 #321
• RE: Histaklus etc

BACKON@vms.huji.ac.il wrote:


> 
> The Yabia Omer 5:3 discusses this issue and permits it b'di'avad on the
> sfek sfeika (e.g the meat being served may have come from an animal where
> there was no loose lung tissue; and b: the meat may have been glatt kosher
> (Rema)


Which follows from the Yalkut Yosef I brought last nihjt. But R' YGB's
objection still stands that :

> But meat labelled glatt in Chu"l is not BY glatt, it is "shochet" glatt (the
> lungs may have what shochtim deem "reerim" as opposed to "sirchos", which,
> if I understand correctly, the BY still views as "sirchos")


Which brings the question of "what is Glatt, then?" Rema glatt, or
"shochet" glatt? And is there still the second safek? or is it a third
safek?


---sam

"Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer" wrote:


> Don't forget BY bread!
> 


I'm glad someone mentioned it. I always wonder what to do when we go out
for meals and they serve cake for hamozi. It's easy enough not to eat
meat, but how do I justify saying hamozi on mezonot? I'm certainly not
going to eat enough of it to say birkat hamazon.


---sam

> This will ultimately become one of the defining
> characteristics of the RW as the MO will undoubtedly
> never accept this custom.

Gee, I'll make sure to tell all the MO Israelis I see whose kids have *long*
peyos that they must be RW...

Haven't you forgotten that Sephardim *also* wear long peyot?

And if MO is the only group that *doesn't* wear them, maybe, just maybe, the
MO are *wrong* this time?

Akiva


A reality check a day keeps
the delusions at bay (Gila Atwood)

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

> As far as the MO vs RW contoversy, I really fail to see the connection
> unless RW is a stab at charedism rather than right wing in political
> terms.

You noticed.

Yes, RW is a stab at charedism...a favorite pastime here.

Akiva


A reality check a day keeps 
the delusions at bay (Gila Atwood)

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

The MaHaRShA explains that the reason it was done that way, is because he 
didn't know what could be an issue otherwise he would have asked directly and 
not go to this extreme, IMHO everything that has been discussed here is clear 
in S"A one need not discuss these things on a public forum.

Kol Tuv

Yitzchok Zirkind

I hereby make a public Mach'oh to the defending of MM, V'ani Es NAfshi 
HItzalti.

Kol Tuv

Yitzchok Zirkind

NB: by Mechallel Shabbos I refer to rescuinge a goy on Shabbos even tho' EMS 
could have done it instead 

Rich Wolpoe

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re[2]: Mendelsohn  
Author:  <avodah@aishdas.org> at tcpgate
Date:    1/25/2000 1:30 PM


Was eivo a factor here?

FWIW I know of a case where a Rav mattired hatzolo to be mechallel shabbos 
"mishum eivo".

Rich Wolpoe


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re:Mendelsohn 
 One example was that he called for not burying the dead for a few days because
non-Jews objected to it and felt that maybe the individual was still alive. He 
argued this way although if im not mistaken it is a chiyuv deoraisa to bury the 
dead immediately. 

I think that we are attempting to discern the boudnaries of good taste, to 
define the limits of how far should we go in tavoiding histaklus, etc. 

Even thoguh we may concur on the basic premise, how to apply it bizman hazeh is 
not so clear.

Rich Wolpoe 

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
<snip>
Does any orthodox person on this list really hold that histaklus (in 
contadiction to ri'ah) is allowed any more in this day and age then back 
in the days of the Mechaber? And do we measure our Jewish values by that 
what is acceptable by current day goyishe media?
<snip>
Daniel

> if diluted up to a sixth. Much of the Israeli Badatz wine,
> and some Rashi
> wines here, perhaps others as well, are "wine product" - not wine by
> Sephardic standards, but Borei Pri Ha'Gafen by Ashkenazic ones.

10-15 years ago this was true, but today most badatz wines (I just checked
at our local makolets/coop/supermarket) go according to the Beit Yosef.

Akiva


A reality check a day keeps
the delusions at bay (Gila Atwood)

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

: Yes, RW is a stab at charedism...a favorite pastime here.

As is insulting MO. Mud has been flying in both directions.

About using the expression "RW" -- I just switched from "Chareidi" to "RW"
because I was told /that/ was the less offensive choice. I'm sorry if my
comments were taken as derogatory, they weren't intended to.

I would have spoken up earlier had I not considered addressing other
discussions to be more pressing. Between content and membership problems,
this has not been a fun week to run this list. I'm running about 10 DNAs
a day.

Frankly, I thought discussing the philosphical differences between mod-O
and Chareidim/RW/whatever would be an interesting learning experience for
those of us who didn't go to schools on both sides of that fence. Also,
we addressed important points on issues where the sociological differences
are greater than the ideological ones.

However, I think we've hit the point where further conversation would do worse
damage to the achdus of our little community than any benefits accrued.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 25-Jan-00: Shelishi, Yisro
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 104b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         

> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 12:18:02 EST
> From: Joelirich@aol.com
> Subject: Re: MO vs RW

<<Which brings us back to one of your usual disagreements - we can all be
Yissachars to the best of the abilities given to us by HKBH.  Can we have
a community of all Yissachars?>>

	I'm not sure if you meant that it is one of MY usual disagreements,  or
if you meant OUR (Avodahs) disagreements.  Be that as it may,  of course
we cannot all be Yissachars,  unless you use the qualifier that you did, 
"to the best of the abilities given to us by HKBH."  That we can all do. 
  However,  for Yissachar only/Zevulun only,  i efshar la'olom bli
zechorim....

	The first choice is to be a Yissachar.   This is,  I repeat,  NOT meant
to be a put down of Zevuluns,  only what the theoretical desideratum
should be and what we should wish for our children,  in consonance with
time honored tradition.

Gershon
(not a Yissachar,  but not well off enough to be a Zevulun either)

> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 12:22:09 -0500
> From: richard_wolpoe@ibi.com
> Subject: Re: Torah hi,  was:  Histaklus BaNashim 
 
<<the practical implicatoins to me seem poshut and are already posted.>>

	I am afraid,  sir,  that you missed my point.  I am not discussing
mechitza/histaklus, etc.  This has already been discussed ad listowner's
nauseum.

	My question is the gedorim of "Torah hi velilmod ani tzarich".

Gershon

> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 13:23:49 -0500
> From: richard_wolpoe@ibi.com
> Subject: Re[2]: Mendelsohn 
 
<<FWIW I know of a case where a Rav mattired hatzolo to be mechallel
shabbos mishum eivo".>>

	Please provide details.  I have been a member of Hatzolo for nearly
twenty years and have some perspective on this.  Hatzolo has an (IMNSHO
undeserved) reputation, in certain circles,  for kalus rosh be'inyanei
Shabbos and I would like to lay this accusation to rest before it goes
any further.
	
	If you wish,  you may respond privately,  but I am posting this to the
list as a macho'oh.

Gershon

>
> Any documentation that anyone has on this?

That the loshon changed between the first and seconf editions is clear. The
reason was told me by the Rav I was learning Hilchos Shabbos with several
years ago.

Akiva


A reality check a day keeps
the delusions at bay (Gila Atwood)

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

In a message dated 1/25/00 1:42:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, Rich Wolpoe 
writes:
<< Was eivo a factor here? >>
No it wasn't. Mendelsohn actually did the Jewish community a favor and wrote 
to the local authorities asking them to allow the Jews to continue the 
practice of immediate burial. It was only to the local Jewish community and 
Rav Yaakov Emden where he expressed his opinion that the Jews should change 
their practice to match that of their Gentile neighbors.

I will provide offline, bli neder

My point was NOT about hztzolom, it was about using eivo to mattir something 
otherswise ossur; and therefore to point out that Mendlesohnn *might* have used 
a valid halachic cavetat to dealy levayos.  If we choose to be dan lekaf z'chus,
we should avoid jumping to conclusions.

And btw, I do not concur that this heter for hatzolo had anything to d owith 
playing fast and loose with Shabbos, If I implied it I apologize.

Rich Wolpoe


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Hatzolo, was Mendelsohn 
Author:  <avodah@aishdas.org> at tcpgate
Date:    1/25/2000 2:14 PM


> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 13:23:49 -0500 
> From: richard_wolpoe@ibi.com
> Subject: Re[2]: Mendelsohn 

<<FWIW I know of a case where a Rav mattired hatzolo to be mechallel 
shabbos mishum eivo".>>

	Please provide details.  I have been a member of Hatzolo for nearly 
twenty years and have some perspective on this.  Hatzolo has an (IMNSHO 
undeserved) reputation, in certain circles,  for kalus rosh be'inyanei 
Shabbos and I would like to lay this accusation to rest before it goes 
any further.
	
	If you wish,  you may respond privately,  but I am posting this to the 
list as a macho'oh.

Gershon

And jsut what did Zvulun desire for his kids? <smile>

Rich Wolpoe

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________


	The first choice is to be a Yissachar.   This is,  I repeat,  NOT meant 
to be a put down of Zevuluns,  only what the theoretical desideratum 
should be and what we should wish for our children,  in consonance with 
time honored tradition.

Gershon
(not a Yissachar,  but not well off enough to be a Zevulun either)

>>     Are there gedorim to this in a practical sense and if so what are they?

Gershon<<

Do you mean the above quote was re: Tora hi? Then indeed you are correct in that
I missed it. I ahd attributed this last snip to the histaklus issue.  I am glad 
we clarified that 

Rich Wolpo

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Torah hi 
Author:  <avodah@aishdas.org> at tcpgate
Date:    1/25/2000 2:13 PM


> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 12:22:09 -0500 
> From: richard_wolpoe@ibi.com
> Subject: Re: Torah hi,  was:  Histaklus BaNashim 

<<the practical implicatoins to me seem poshut and are already posted.>>

	I am afraid,  sir,  that you missed my point.  I am not discussing 
mechitza/histaklus, etc.  This has already been discussed ad listowner's 
nauseum.

	My question is the gedorim of "Torah hi velilmod ani tzarich".

Gershon

How does this prove that Menedelsohnn did not do so out of "eivo"?  Often a 
"middle man" will tell X to give in to Y and fro Y to give into X.  

Rich wolpoe


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Mendelsohn 

In a message dated 1/25/00 1:42:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, Rich Wolpoe 
writes:
<< Was eivo a factor here? >>
No it wasn't. Mendelsohn actually did the Jewish community a favor and wrote 
to the local authorities asking them to allow the Jews to continue the 
practice of immediate burial. It was only to the local Jewish community and 
Rav Yaakov Emden where he expressed his opinion that the Jews should change 
their practice to match that of their Gentile neighbors.

In a message dated 1/25/00 1:42:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, Rich wolpoe 
writes:
<< Doesn't lo ro'inu eino rayo apply here?  >>
Definitely not. I already explained this in my second post but I will answer 
your point again. If it is "lo ro'inu" the it was not done publicly. R. 
Rakefet claimed that is was done "bifnei Am Vaeida." I was a member of that 
"Am" and "Eida." Myself And everybody else I spoke to were "Lo ro'inu" so it 
is a rayo that it wasn't done publicly. Which means R. Rakefets comment is 
motsi shem ra.
 Could such a thing go on behind closed doors? Anything is possible. But no 
matter what that was not R. Rakefets assertion. And to claim something 
happened in private, as terrible as that might be, in no way compares to 
claiming that it was done in front of the entire community, which insinuates 
that the community let it go on. In any case I don't think it happened in 
private either. 

Greetings from snowny New York,

Don't be so sure of things -- who would have thought 25 years ago that it 
would presently be impossible to buy any Milk but Cholov Yisroel Milk in 
Kosher supermarkets in New York?  Sure there is a rightward shift -- fathers 
without black hats, kids with black hats, etc. -- and sure it does lead to 
certain curious revisionisms (my favorite is the Artscroll Children's 
Megillah depicts the Jewish men of that time period as wearing either black 
hats or shtreimlach) but is it such a huge issue?

>

>------------------------------
>
>Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 09:14:27 -0800 (PST)
>From: Harry Maryles <hmaryles@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Re: Histaklus BaNashim
>
>- --- DFinchPC@aol.com wrote:
> >
> > How much of this entire topic is the creation of
> > certain Northern European
> > thinkers whose adherents, for a variety of
> > historical reasons, have come to
> > hold sway in the RW world today?
>
>If you mean seperate seating at weddings, I believe it
>is entirely the influence of Chasidim. The Holocaust
>survivors who immigrated to America were mostly
>Chasidic in origin and brought with them chumros that
>have been adopted by the Litvishe world. Some of that
>influence was good in that it re-established an the
>almost extinct Halacha of married women covering their
>hair. But some of it was IMHO bad as in the
>unnecessary incorporation of seperate seating at not
>only weddings but any social event.  When Telshe first
>came to Chicago, it's banquets had mixed seating. but
>it was "embarrassed" into establishing separate
>seating by the Chasidim, who would disparage Telshe
>for having mixed seating at their banquets. I think
>Peyos (You know, sidecurls, earlocks) are another
>chasidic influence foisted on the Litvishe community.
>
>Pet Peeve: Peyos were anathema to the Litvishe but are
>now pretty much standard on the children who attend
>the RW yeshivishe/Litvishe dayschool. It is not
>uncommon to see fathers without Peyos and all their
>sons with peyos.  Ultimately of course these children
>grow up with peyos and non-peyos will be a forgotten
>tradition and history will be revised to say peyos
>were always the norm amongst Bnei Torah.
>
>This will ultimately become one of the defining
>characteristics of the RW as the MO will undoubtedly
>never accept this custom.
>
>HM
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
>http://im.yahoo.com
>
>------------------------------
>


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

I this a request to cease and desist debating disctinctionw between MO and RW or
whatever the preferred labels are?

Rich Wolpoe

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________

However, I think we've hit the point where further conversation would do worse 
damage to the achdus of our little community than any benefits accrued.

-mi

	Doesn't the gemara say that Hashem cries over those who could learn
and don't as well as vice versa.
	 
> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 11:24:13 -0500
> From: Gershon Dubin <gershon.dubin@juno.com>
> Subject: Re: MO vs RW
> 
> On Tue, 25 Jan 2000 10:51:00 -0500 <richard_wolpoe@ibi.com> writes:
> > imho that rabbi was pre-supposing that:
>  
> <<1) we should wish for the highest goals for our children (so do I but
> read on) 
>     2) being a talmid chochom is the highest goal,
>     3) a gvir baal tzedokoh is therfore somwhat "inferior"
>     4) we do NOT value different communal roles equally but favor some
> over the expense of others
>    5) Therefore people who are communal leaders are "inferior" to 
> talmidei Chachomim and in order to avoid this do we propose to mold
> potential gvirim into Talmide chachomim thereby molding square pegs into
> round wholes?  
> 
> Doesn't this sound like what Hirsch said was "wrong" in the way eisav was
> raised?>>
> 
> 	No it doesn't.   We DO value certain roles over others.  Do you
> doubt
> that the talmid chochom is at the top of the communal pyramid,  at least
> in theory?  Therefore,  when a child is wished at his bris to be the best
> possible person he can be,  does it not mean a talmid chochom?
> 
> 	This is not to say everyone should be shoehorned into the same mold.
> 
> But even Esav didn't show his characteristics at his bris.  Is this child
> (or any) to be pigeonholed into being a baal tzedoko at the expense of
> being a talmid chochom at this point in his life?  Or should we at least
> hope that he attain that lofty level?
> 
> 	Note:  my distinction in the words of that rabbi was:
> 
> 	TC+gvir vs. Gvir only; meaning one at the expense of the other.
> 	Please do not assume I meant that the choice was otherwise.
> 
> << Is Zevulun's role any less worthy of the broch of l'Torah than
> Yissachar's?>>
> 
> 	I think so.  If a person can be one or the other,   which of course
> is a
> practical impossibility (having the choice,  that is),  shouldn't he
> choose Yissachar?  Gvirim who are Zvuluns have been known to regret their
> not having become Yissachars (yeh,  easy for him to say <g>!)
> 
> Gershon 
> 

Got it. I'm glad you clarified this 

Rich Wolpoe
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Avodah V4 #321 
Author:  <avodah@aishdas.org> at tcpgate
Date:    1/25/2000 2:39 PM


In a message dated 1/25/00 1:42:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, Rich wolpoe 
writes:
<< Doesn't lo ro'inu eino rayo apply here?  >>
Definitely not. I already explained this in my second post but I will answer 
your point again. If it is "lo ro'inu" the it was not done publicly. R. 
Rakefet claimed that is was done "bifnei Am Vaeida." I was a member of that 
"Am" and "Eida." Myself And everybody else I spoke to were "Lo ro'inu" so it 
is a rayo that it wasn't done publicly. Which means R. Rakefets comment is 
motsi shem ra.
 Could such a thing go on behind closed doors? Anything is possible. But no 
matter what that was not R. Rakefets assertion. And to claim something 
happened in private, as terrible as that might be, in no way compares to 
claiming that it was done in front of the entire community, which insinuates 
that the community let it go on. In any case I don't think it happened in 
private either. 

> About using the expression "RW" -- I just switched from
> "Chareidi" to "RW"
> because I was told /that/ was the less offensive choice.

I'm curious why RW would be considered less offensive, since charedi is the
term charedim use to describe themselves.

RW is meaningless, unless you can specify the axis you are using to define
it (for example, a horizontal line with the state being the beginning of the
redemption on the left, The Satmar Rav on the right. On that scale, is ploni
LW/RW makes sense. ANY OTHER USE OF RW/LW IS MEANINGLESS).

> Frankly, I thought discussing the philosphical differences
> between mod-O
> and Chareidim/RW/whatever would be an interesting learning
> experience for
> those of us who didn't go to schools on both sides of that
> fence. Also,

It would be, IF it consisted of "In our derech, we do X and here's why".
That's educational.

Unfortunatly, it too soon turns into "the other derechs do Y/Don't do X, and
they're wrong because of this."

My $0.02

Akiva




A reality check a day keeps
the delusions at bay (Gila Atwood)

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

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


[ 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         ]