Avodah Mailing List

Volume 06 : Number 032

Tuesday, November 7 2000

• RE: beriah and dinosaur bones
• Re: parshat Noach
• RE: Waiting in a minyan
• RE: Kiddush intro
• Re: beriah and dinosaur bones
• Re: More from Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky
• Hoshei'a 1: part 1
• Re: siyyum after masekhta
• Re: Kiddush intro
• woman's tfila
• Re: Hoshei'a 1: part 1
• doing t'shuvah
• Vatishaceis ha'aretz
• Re: parshas Noach
• Re: woman's tfila
• More from Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky
• RE: parshas Noach
• Re: parshat Noach
• beriah and dinosaur bones
• animals / flowers
• Tzohar
• Re: ohr lagoyim
• 3 on Parshas Lech-Lechoh
• Birthday special

Yitzchok Zlochower
> My statement in Av. 6:29 ("animals in the teiva" topic) about when
> dinosaurs ceased to exist seems to have raised some hackles.  R'
> Yitzchok Zirkind is correct when he says that my, "Now we know.."
> doesn't include him and others...

> Those who maintain that there were six literal 24 hour days of creation,
> and that Hashem created fossils in the ground and set the ratio of
> radioactive isotopes to products such that they would imply an earth
> that was billions of years old will not accept the evidence for
> dinosaurs that existed from some 200 to 65.0 million years ago..

BUT if you go with a multiple stage creation 
THEN
the 6 days are not literal
AND
The current olam Hazeh dates from Adam harishon
And Adam DID start off with a mature world that had dinorasur fossils etc.

So there is a middle-of-the-road approach.

There were phsyical "worlds" or epochs that precded ours.  Druing those
epochs dinosaurs lived and became extinct

But in the current 5761-year-old-world, Adam was born into a world that is
compeltely mature with  pre-existing fossils etc.

From a purely natural science perspective, 15 billion years works and from a
theological perpsctive 5761 also works, because there is no theology before
Adam.  

As far as we are concrened in our current world of Torah and Mitzvos, the
pre-Adam world might as well have been 5.5 days.

Shalom and Regards,
Rich Wolpoe
Richard_Wolpoe@ibi.com  
 

On Sun, 5 Nov 2000, Eli Turkel wrote:
> How did the animals get from the mideast to other continents eg America,
> Australia after the flood?

> How come there are animals like the kangaroo found only in Australia
> and not in Turkey if they all started at mount ararat?

Through Hashgochas Hashem yisborach.

KT,
YGB
Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/rygb

Larry Engelhart
> To me it seems obvious decency to wait until everyone has concluded the
> Amida before continuing on - same for Shma.
..
> If you were serving a fancy, multi-course dinner and a guest was slower
> eating the soup, wouldn't the good host wait until the "slow" person
> finished before beginning to serve the next course?

Question: What if while waiting patiently for the slow-ones to finish, the
quick ones - in thier state of boredom - proceed to chat and distrub the
decorum of the services?

I have sung in many choirs over the years.  Too slow can be just as
out-of-sync as too fast.  It seems to me that there is a golden mean here
too

Shalom and Regards,
Rich Wolpoe
Richard_Wolpoe@ibi.com  

Gershon Dubin gershon.dubin@juno.com
>> Al kein Beirach,
>> Vayihi Erev
>> Al Pi Hashem beyad Moshe

> Both answers to kedusha: kadosh and baruch, are pasuk "fragments"

FWIW I made a distinction between Nach and Chumash.

The principle kol passuk dlo passak Moshe Rabbeinu... implies this
distinction.

So I would say fragements from Nach are widely accepted in the liturgy and
literature.

For fragemnts from both Chumash and Nach, see the motso'ai Shabbos Poem Amar
Hashem Leyaakov...

Shalom and Regards,
Rich Wolpoe
Richard_Wolpoe@ibi.com  

On Sun, Nov 05, 2000 at 04:24:18PM -0500, Isaac A Zlochower wrote:
: R' Micah Berger seems to object to my "65 million years since the demise
: of the dinosaurs" based on the fact that its not part of the mesorah...

You misattribute ideas to me.

My problem with accepting scientific theories of our origins is that man
can't comprehend b'reishis (as per the Maharal). This rules out both
chacham -- whether a chacham biTorah or a scientist, and navi --  even the
text of the Torah (!), from describing it.

: Neither is a 15 billion year universe for that matter.  R' Yitzchok of
: Acco introduced that as his own chidush (albeit based on some older
: sources).

Isn't that from mesorah, though? I mean after all, it's all chidushim
based on earlier gar'inim all the way back to Moshe.

By this definition, there is actually more mesorah indicating a non-literal
interpretation of B'reishis perek aleph than literalists. Even before the
current scientific problem arose. After it arose, I opine that the existance
of liberal movements has shifted the tendency in the O community toward
maximalist positions. IOW, taking beri'ah literally is within mesorah, but
the popularity of the idea bizman hazeh is actually atypical, and due to
sociological issues.


On Mon, Nov 06, 2000 at 09:40:47AM -0500, Wolpoe, Richard replied:
: BUT if you go with a multiple stage creation
: THEN
: the 6 days are not literal

Yes they could be. The last stage of creation took 6+1 days as we now
measure days.

In fact, preserving the time span of Bereishis 1:2 onward is a strong
motivation toward accepting the dual-creation theory. It gives a literal
read of ma'aseh bereishis and also accounts for objects that are more
than 6 millenia old.

: AND
: The current olam Hazeh dates from Adam harishon

LAD, this is implied by the fact that beri'ah is place in the week preceeding
Rosh haShanah. Haras olam is therefore before the calendar, not within it.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 When you come to a place of darkness,
micha@aishdas.org            you do not chase out the darkness with a broom.
http://www.aishdas.org       You light a candle.
(973) 916-0287                  - R' Yekusiel Halberstam of Klausenberg zt"l

R. Gershon Dubin wrote:
     
> In the lower grades they should be taught the entire tefila, according to 
> their age and abilities.  In the upper grades,  however, they should be taught
> to daven LESS than they had previously been taught;
> i.e. they should daven only what they are required to me'ikar hadin.  
     
> The reason is that when they get older, and are busy with families, they 
> should not make the mistake of thinking that if they cannot daven the entire 
> davening,  they have accomplished nothing and eventually wind up not davening 
> at all.  Comments?
     
There seems to be two derachim in chinuch.  One is to teach so people will be 
prepared for the future.  The other is to teach by having people do now.  For 
example, giving a child a lulav that is not his.  He is not being mekayem the 
mitzvah of lulav but does not know that so is being trained to be mekayem the 
mitzvah when he gets older.  This case is a machlokes rishonim and a stirah in 
the Mishnah Berurah.

In a slightly different vein, RYK's case seems to be should these young women be
preparing for their (I"YH) imminent future when they will not have time to daven
fully by getting used to davening the minimum necessary or should they chap 
arein (?) now while they have the chance and fulfill the mitzvah as best as 
possible.

Based on RYK's pesak, they should be preparing for what (IY"H) will soon be 
their situation for many years.

A similar case is whether shuls should keep their ezras nashims open and lighted
for Minchah/Ma'ariv on erev/Shabbos for single women.  It is certainly a mitzvah
for them to daven with a minyan.  However, if they get used to that, when they 
are married and unable to go to shul at those times they will feel cheated.  In 
other words, should they be preparing for the future or living for the moment.  
It seems like RYK would want the ezras nashims closed and/or unlighted at those 
times.

Gil Student

We got through the text of perek aleph of Hoshei'a, but didn't get to any
rishonim beyond looking for help when we were stuck understanding the text.
Mostly the Metzudah.

We plan on using the three rishonim who are "on the daf": Rashi, Ibn Ezra
and Radak. Also, R' Noah Witty brought a likut of Rambam on Nach.

Now, on to some issues that came up that stuck in my memory (problem with
a Fri night seder -- it's a long time until I can record my thoughts):

- Note the similarity between 1:1 and the first pasuk of Yeshaiah. However,
  the rishonim all note "chazon Yeshaiahu" and talk about nevu'ah being
  a "chazon". Yet here (or in Yirmiyahu) the seifer is called "d'var Hashem".
  Why doesn't this equally imply that nevu'ah is speech?

  See the Radak, whose comment may suggest an answer.

  Also, note that 1:1 has no verb.

- The nevu'ah isn't placed in time. 1:1 tells us that any one of four
  malchei Yisrael of Yeihu's line could have been king, but we don't know
  which. For comparison, Yeshaiahu's first nevu'ah isn't until perek 6,
  there are 5 perakim of later nevu'os that are printed first.

  The expression 'od me'at' in 1:4 might me that this was closer to the
  end of Hoshei'a's nevu'ah.

  According to the Rambam, the whole sequence of marriage and having
  children was the body of the nevu'ah. However bipashtus he actually
  married the woman. It takes quite a while to get married and have three
  children. (The third was not concieved until the second was weened.)

- 1:4 took us most of the time, largely because we lacked the historical
  background. Here's what we put together from the Metzudah, Ibn Ezrah
  and Melachim II.

  Yeihu was nitztaveh to kill Achav in a place called Yizra'el. However,
  as Yeihu subsequently became an oveid avodah zarah, the killing of
  Achav became considered "dam naki". So Hoshei'a is told to warn Yeihu's
  line. He foretells Zecharia's death and the end of Malchus Yisrael.

- 1:6 is ambiguous: either Hashem is saying He will no longer carry
  the avonos of malchus Yisrael, or that He will pick up that burden
  if they do teshuvah.

- 1:7 possibly also hints that Yehudah's galus Bavel will be shorter
  than a single lifetime, and/or that Sancheirev will be vanquished in
  malchus Yehudah in a lima'alah min hateva way.

  We tried mapping the three children's names to specific future events.
  Multiple answers suggested themselves, which is why we were left with
  an ambiguity. Hopefully the rishonim address it. As it is, we couldn't
  decide whether the reference to malchus Yisrael was about the days of
  Sancheirev or those of Cyrus.

- 1:8 mentions that Lo-Ruchamah was weined before Lo-Ami was born. But
  there is no similar statement before Lo-Ruchamah was born. Why? (I
  just noticed that the first child, Yizrael, was "vatoled *lo* ben",
  while the "lo" is omitted for the other two.)

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 When you come to a place of darkness,
micha@aishdas.org            you do not chase out the darkness with a broom.
http://www.aishdas.org       You light a candle.
(973) 916-0287                  - R' Yekusiel Halberstam of Klausenberg zt"l

: the "siyyum"  {ie. Hadran alach} we do at after a Seder Mishayno is not
: in the Mishnayos either! <smile>

After all, doesn't hadran alakh mean chazarnu alayikh, We repeated it!
So shouldn't we say it only when finishing for the second time?

David

RYGB's comment on the kiddush intro was <<I now only say Yom Ha'Shishi
because of the kol pasuk shelo paskei Moshe problem.>>

????

Since when is yom hashishi a complete sentence? 

How is this an improvement over starting silently with vayhi erev?

Why is this better than starting silently with vayar and saying the
entire sentence.

If you don't count the words to get 72, or feel a need for the YKVK
of the rashei teivot of the first four words said aloud, why don't you
start with vaykhulu?

Bewildered,
David

> There seems to be two derachim in chinuch. One is to teach so people will be
> prepared for the future. The other is to teach by having people do now.

Can you quote another mitzvah where we tell someone not to fufill it fully
now,if possible, based on current circumstances, because things will change
in the future.  I don't think you can count chinuch since mduraita there is
no chiyuv on the child right then and I think all would agree lchatchila
that the child should fulfil the mitzvah the same way as when they will be a
gadol.

KT,
Joel Rich

PS This sounds like we don't have confidence that we can communicate the
halachik priorities to women so mutav sheyihiyu shoggigim when they're
single (or as they say "how are you gonna keep'em down on the farm once
they've seen gay Parise")

The meforshim all have a problem with Hashem's command to Hoshei'a
to marry an "eishes zenunim". Some even go so far as to say that the
marriage and childbirths were all part of a dream (see Radak, Abarbanel).

The Maharatz Chayes (Toras Nevi'im, Hora'as Sha'ah ch. 4 p. 30 n. 1)
asks a simple question. Since Hoshei'a was not a kohen, what issur is
there in his marrying a zonah? What's the whole fuss?

Gil Student

The point that was raised by Eli Turkel about the great difficulty of 
completely stopping  to commit a particular sin is acknowledged by Rav 
Sadiah Gaon in his discussion of the t'shuvah process. See Emunot 
V'deot(5:5, page 184 in the edition of Rav Kaffach zt"l) which is very 
encouraging.The Rav zt"l compares the Rambam and Rav Sadiah Gaon in "Al 
Hatshuvah" page226.

I understood the story of Noach in the following way, and didn't find out
until a discussion during our Nach chaburah that this peshat is atypical.

I assumed that "vehinei nishchasa" is being used to mean "and behold it is
[as good as] destroyed", and only by derivative does it imply corruption.
Much like "keitz kol basar ba lifanai". In the same way, lulav shel ir
hanidachas is pasul because it's [as good as] burnt already. Or perhaps
an example of the prophetic past. Or even perhaps a statement that corruption
cuts one from the Source, and therefore there is no shefa left, the destruction
is only a matter of time.

Otherwise perek vuv switches back and forth between two meanings of the
same word.

-mi

PS: Also note that in perek aleph, "vayar E-lokim ki tov" is translated by
Unkelus as "arei tav". (Just like the first pasuk of Beshalach "lo nacham
E-lokim derech eretz Pelishtim ki karov hu", the "ki" is "arei".) Not "diha".
Hashem didn't see *that* it was good, He saw it *because* it was good.
Had it not been good, it wouldn't exist, and there would be nothing for HKBH
to see.

-- 
Micha Berger                 When you come to a place of darkness,
micha@aishdas.org            you do not chase out the darkness with a broom.
http://www.aishdas.org       You light a candle.
(973) 916-0287                  - R' Yekusiel Halberstam of Klausenberg zt"l

RET:

>How did the animals get from the mideast to other continents eg America,
>Australia after the flood?

>How come there are animals like the kangaroo found only in Australia
>and not in Turkey if they all started at mount ararat?

Really two questions, the second of which has several speculative
possiblities. Actually, the first one does as well. I just want to point
out that on the most obvious level, this doesn't present a problem, because
there weren't different continents until Peleg's time. 

Eli 

>              I don't think you can count chinuch since mduraita there is no 
> chiyuv on the child right then and I think all would agree lchatchila that the
> child should fulfil the mitzvah the same way as when they will be a gadol.
     
Is there a chiyuv mide'oraisa for a woman (or anyone) to daven with a minyan?

> PS This sounds like we don't have confidence that we can communicate the 
> halachik priorities to women so mutav sheyihiyu shoggigim when they're 
> single 

"Mutav..." does not apply here because these women are not violating any 
prohibition.

It is less a matter of communication than one of hergel and emotions.  There are
far too many men and women who get used to the single way of life and then 
resent their spouses when they finally get married.

Gil Student

From: "Wolpoe, Richard" <richard_wolpoe@ibi.com>
> I'm not sure if this was R. Yaakov's kavvanah <pun>, it just makes sense to
> me to focus on a narrower set of tefilos when time is pressing. And it makes
> sense that students typically have more liesure than do the parents of young
> children.

	His point was that although the students do in fact have more time,
it is necessary to educate them as to what is critical to davening and what
is not, to prepare for the eventuality IY"H that they will have less time,
and not to feel at that time that they are not doing what they should.

Gershon
gdubin@loebandtroper.com
gershon.dubin@juno.com

> out that on the most obvious level, this doesn't present a 
> problem, because
> there weren't different continents until Peleg's time. 

Source?

Akiva

In a message dated 11/5/00 1:34:11 PM EST, turkel@math.tau.ac.il writes:
>  How did the animals get from the mideast to other continents eg America,
>  Australia after the flood?

>  How come there are animals like the kangaroo found only in Australia
>  and not in Turkey if they all started at mount ararat?

See the previously mentioned RaDaL on the Pirkei DR"E 23.


In a message dated 11/5/00 1:34:07 PM EST, daniel@pluto.ame.arizona.edu writes:
>>> dinosaurs perished 65 million years ago as a result of the massive
>>> upheaval produced by the asteroid impact in the Yucatan - long before

>> WADR I don't know of such! neither do many who do not accept this 
>> interpertaion.

>  WADR, it isn't an interpretation, it is a theory.  The two words conote
>  significantly different analytical methods.

Teitch in the Psukim and Mamorei Chazal are interpertations that are not 
universally accepted.


In a message dated 11/5/00 7:32:44 PM EST, zlochoia@bellatlantic.net writes:
> Those who maintain that there were six literal 24 hour days of creation

Which include the Gemara according to Rashi Chagiga 12a.


In a message dated 11/6/00 4:52:52pm EST, linaseli@mail.netvision.net.il writes:
> I just want to point
> out that on the most obvious level, this doesn't present a problem, because
> there weren't different continents until Peleg's time

If you are suggesting sepertaion of the plates See Rashi's Teitch 10:25.

Kol Tuv, 
Yitzchok Zirkind

Let me thank Akiva for correcting my post.  I agree entirely with him
that one must carefully distinguish between essentially non-halachic
aspects of the mesorah and halacha lema'aseh.  We do not have the
authority to change accepted practical halacha based on scientific
findings - except in cases of pikuach nefesh.  One should also carefully
distinguish between the physical basis and the rationales offered by
chazal for certain takonot such as giluy (concern that a Gentile vendor
may have left certain foodstuffs exposed to snakes) or mayim shelanu
(concern that freshly drawn well-water for making matzot will have been
warmed by the sun travelling under the earth at night).  The physical
bases for the above takonot are certainly valid, but the explanations
are questionable.   The above dinim can be made consistent with
scientific knowledge by changing the rationales to concern about food
poisoning due to bacterial or fungul growth, and to the effect of the
enormous heat capacity of the earth in keeping well - water at a
relatively constant temperature (which will be warmer than the overnight
surface temperature of an unheated room in the springtime.

An extensive, referenced treatment of this topic has been given by Rav
Shlomo Sternberg, a mathematics prof. at Harvard,  in the BDD journal
published by Bar - Ilan (R. Sternberg may still have copies of his
article).

Yitzchok Zlochower

> RSRH writes that the differences in flora and fuana are part of HKBH's
> processes in separates us in different cultures and languages. IOW,
> this is part of the neis of dor hahaflagah.

> FWIW, the grape (of all things) was found to originate in Harei
> Ararat. (Ararat is a mountain range, not a single mountain.)

That still doesn't answer the question of how physically animals
moved from Ararat across oceans when there is no land connection
between Asia and America or Australia or myriads of islands like Hawaii.

Eli Turkel

From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>

<<Why is the os b'ris a rainbow? The keshes shape is straightforward --
it's a bow pointing away from the ground, in keeping with the havtachah.
But why is it a spectrum?>>

	To emphasize the need of not mixing the minim,  which led to the
mabul.

Gershon
gdubin@loebandtroper.com
gershon.dubin@juno.com

In a message dated 11/5/00 1:32:48 PM EST, gershon.dubin@juno.com writes:
> The topic of whether there is an independent responsibility of being
>  an ohr lagoyim...

Al Timna Tov, Vein Tov Eloh Torah.

Kol Tuv, 
Yitzchok Zirkind

1) Some years ago, an irreligious friend, who had a weekly Chumash shiur(!),
asked me re "Imri No Achosi Ot, L'maan Yitav Li Baavurech......"

Hayitochen that Avrohom Ovinu was prepared to be mafkir his wife Soroh, for the
benefits he could derive from such an action... (or even to save his life)???

I told him that I am sure that the Malbim explains AO's actions - and looked
it up and BH he indeed does.

The Malbim writes that the situation then was similar to today's Arab society,
where a man who wishes to marry, will pay a dowry to the prospective girls
father. If the father is not alive, then he deals with another relative of
hers - usually a brother.

AO, knowing that the Mitzrim would cast an eye on Soroh, called himself her
brother, and (as she had no father,) he would be fielding requests for her
hand in marriage.

This way, he would ask for an exorbitant dowry - which no one could afford -
and azoi, he would be potur of them in the nicest and best possible way.

What he didn't count on, however, was that Paroh himself would be one of
the candidates and he - being the king - COULD afford ANY price...

(Ayin 'in'eveinig' - where he puts it all into the posuk - kedarko bekodesh...)

2) Years ago, I heard from a talmid of Rav Yosef Zvi Dushinsky z'l a vort
b'shem his rebbe on L'maan Yitav Li Baavurech (Rashi: yitnu li matonos)...
V'choyso Nafshi Biglolech...

RYZD asked: Punkt farkert! Soneh Matonos Yichyeh...!?

He answered that the pshat is...Yitnu li matonos. However, I (= AO) will
refuse to accept these matonos and because Soneh Matonos *Yichyeh*...
therefore: *V'choyso* Nafshi Biglolech...

3) Q: AO was concerned that the Mitzrim would first kill him and then take
Soroh. If he knew that they were such primitives (and obviously not concerned
about murder - one of the 7 mitzvos bnei noach), ver zogt that would kill
him? Maybe they'll simply abduct Soroh (and also not be concerned about the
issur of adultery)?

A: Al pi a cheder joke about a young boy who was hauled before his principal
and asked why he stole a watch from the local jeweller?

The boy answered, that every time he went past the store and saw the watch,
he was oiver on 'Lo Sachmod", so he decided, better once "Lo Signov" -
than dozens of "Lo Sachmod's"...

The same here - AO was concerned that the Mitzri 'lomdim' will also make
this pshetl - rather be oiver once on the Lo Sirtzoch (thus making Soroh
a widow and no longer an eishes ish), than REPEATEDLY be oiver on Lo Sinof
(if she was still married).

(See Daas Zkenim Mibaalei Tosfos - who partially write in this vein.)

SHLOMO B ABELES

A friend of mine recently told me that a person's birthday is a
special day of Kirva to HKB"H and an especially good day for prayer
and asking things.

Does anyone know any sources for this?

Shoshana L. Boublil

All work that is done, should be done out of love.
Then it ceases to be difficult, or boring, or embarrassing.
Even a cup or a plate can be washed with devotion until they shine,
out of aspiration for  perfection and completion.
                                Rav A.Y. HaCohen Kook

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


[ 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         ]