Avodah Mailing List

Volume 25: Number 20

Sun, 13 Jan 2008

• 1. Re: Fwd: Beshalach "Miriam, A Woman of Action" (Michael Makovi)
• 2. Re: [Areivim] "Blei Gissen" should we believe in this? (Richard Wolpoe)
• 3. Isaac Leeser (Prof. Levine)
• 4. Re: manipulating bodily energies (T613K@aol.com)
• 5. Re: Did L. Reebe Call RYDS Gaol Hador? Please Confirm (Saul Guberman)
• 6. abayudaya (Michael Elzufon)
• 7. Re: What is galut (Michael Makovi)
• 8. Re: abayudaya (Zev Sero)
• 9. Re: Isaac Leeser (Zev Sero)
• 10. Re: Seeing the Alps (kennethgmiller@juno.com)
• 11. Re: Did L. Reebe Call RYDS Gaol Hador? Please Confirm (Micha Berger)
• 12. Re: Did L. Reebe Call RYDS Gaol Hador? Please Confirm (Zev Sero)

> "And Miriam the prophetess, the sister of Aaron, took a tambourine in her
> hand; and all the women went out after her with tambourines, dancing. And
> Miriam answered them, 'Sing to the Lord, for He has triumphed gloriously;
> the horse and his rider has He thrown into the sea." (Shmot 15:20,21)
>
> Here Miriam is described as both a prophetess and as the sister of Aharon.
> Why is she not described as the sister of Moshe? Rashi explains that she
> achieved prophecy at the point when she was only the sister of Aharon,
> before Moshe was born. What was the content of her prophecy? That one day
> Moshe would be the savior. This prophecy led Miriam to action: she
> encouraged her parents who had separated to reunite.
>
> Amram was afraid lest a son be born; the child would be taken and executed.
> In such a world, he reasoned, it was better not to have children. Miriam
> chastised her father and declared that he was worse than the hated Par'oh
> himself, for Par'oh only threatened the male children, while Amram's plan
> would prevent all children from being born. Amram accepted his daughter's
> argument; he and Yocheved remarried, and the couple were serenaded by their
> older children. Soon enough a son was born and the light of his aura filled
> the room.
>
> R' Abraham Ben HaRambam says it was because she was Aaron's equal in
> prophecy, whereas Moses was the "father" of all prophets, (hence he was in a
> class by himself).
>

I think it is Rabbi Joseph Telushkin who says that since Miriam and
Aaron grew up together, while Moshe spent his life in Pharaoh's court
and Midian, Miriam would be associated with Aaron (in the popular
mind) far more than with Moshe.

Mikha'el Makovi

On Jan 8, 2008 2:43 PM, Zev Sero <zev@sero.name> wrote:

>
> To which I reply, have you seen Perek Bameh Ishah?  I don't know how
> someone can state with a straight face that the Amoraim did not believe
> in or use segulot and amulets.  One can argue with the Rambam that they
> were mistaken in so doing, but to deny that they did so in the first
> place?
> --
> Zev Sero


There is no question that many Tannaim and Amoraim used kameios, and
accepted them to be carried in Reshus Harrabim etc.

What is unclear is how wer they effective? if they had a certain Tefillah or
affirmation [e.g. this amulet wil bring a refuah shleima to its wearer ...]
then it might not have worked by means of "magic" but rather by means of
"positive thi9nking" similar to a pacebo.  IOW the amulet might have been
used to psychological hizzuk and not as a superstitious chachka.

I don't know if the above is fact.  It is simply my understanding that a lot
of spiritual practices work on the conscious and subconscious mind of the
individual = maybe on the neshama level if you will [psyche is Greek for
soul iirc]

Some rationalists ridivuculed Emil Coue's positive affirmation school, but
others have used his techniques with success. many athlets and sports
coaches use these techniques with success.

Bottom line:

   1.  kameyas were approved by many [iif not all of] Hazal
   2.  their power might not quite be the popular notion of "magic" but
   of spiritua;l/psycholigcal hizzuk


-- 
Kol Tuv / Best Regards,
RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com
see: http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080113/35602aa0/attachment-0001.html 

At 10:18 AM 1/13/2008, Jonathan Baker wrote:


>Nitpick: not Colonial, but antebellum.  Born in 1808, raised in Germany,
>he came to the US in 1824.  Bemoaning the state of Jewish education and
>publishing, he set about doing something about it, publishing his own
>translations of "Instruction in the Mosaic Religion", the Chumash,
>the Tanach, his own writings in Jewish education, and other English-
>language Judaica, as well as both German and Portuguese-rite siddurim,
>etc.  He started a well-regarded magazine that is still quoted today
>(by R' Yosef Wikler in his Yoreh Deah classes), the Jewish Publication
>Society, and Maimonides College, the first attempt at a rabbinical
>seminary in the US (1867-73).
>
>He was the rabbi at Cong. Mikveh Israel in Philadelphia, their Spanish
>& Portuguese synagogue, for over 20 years, so it's not too surprising
>that he transliterated Shema as Shema/nj/.

Since we are nitpicking, let me point out that Isaac Leeser was not a 
rabbi. He was the chazzan of Cong. Mikveh Israel. The first ordained 
Orthodox rabbi to come to America was R. Avraham Rice. He arrived in 1840.

For information about the accomplishments of Isaac Leeser, please see
"<http://www.jewishpress.com/displayContent_new.cfm?contentid=21906&;mode=a&contentname=Isaac_Leeser:_Architect_of_Traditional_Judaism_in_America&recnum=4&sectionid=14>Isaac 
Leeser: Architect of Traditional Judaism in America" The Jewish 
Press, June 22, 2007, page 1.  http://tinyurl.com/2f3eu9

There is no question that Chazzan Leeser was the outstanding Jewish 
leader of the 19th century.  BTW, the "well-regarded magazine" he 
published was called the Occident. The issues from 1843 to 1852 are 
available on the Internet at 
http://www.jewish-history.com/Occident/index.html . If you have the 
time, I think that you will find some of fascinating reading.



Yitzchok Levine 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080113/a4b115c0/attachment-0001.htm 

 
 

R' Zev Sero wrote:
>>This is moreshes avosenu<<
 
and R' Richard Wolpoe _rabbirichwolpoe@gmail.com_ 
(mailto:rabbirichwolpoe@gmail.com)  wrote:


>>When Moishe Rabbeinu came down from the mountain the Egel was  minhag 
Yisroel
And so was the Egel Minhag for 10 Sevatim after  Yerav'am
And was AZA prevalent in the during the late of Bayyis  Rishon....
 
 

...So are you REALLY saying is that any superstition that violates  Tamim
tihyeh im Hashem Elokecha is OK so long as it is  popular?<<

-- 
Kol Tuv / Best  Regards,
RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com
see:  http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/




>>>>>
Are you seriously trying to claim that davening at  Kever Rochel or singing 
Sholom Aleichem is the same as the egel or the A'Z  temple of Yeravam?!  That 
is quite a stretch.  If the debate here is  over normative Judaism, it is 
certainly RRW and not RZS who is taking the  radical position.  (The question of 
davening to the Rebbe /instead of/  davening to Hashem is a far more serious 
problem, and on that point RRW may  well be correct.)   But saying at a tzaddik's 
kever  "Please be a meilitz yosher for us" is /not/ A'Z.  "Kol beramah  
nishma, Rochel mevaka al baneha" establishes the principle that tzaddikim can  ask 
Hashem for rachamim for their children -- even after said tzaddikim have  left 
this world.  Asking them, "Go to Father and plead for us" is not  A'Z.  
Asking the malachim to give you a bracha is likewise not A'Z, any  more than asking 
any person for a bracha is A'Z.  "Al tehi birchas hedyot  kal be'einecha" 
means ordinary people can bentsh other people, and  certainly malachim can. If a 
person can bentsh another person, what is to say  you can't actually ask for a 
bracha?    It is still up to Hashem  to fulfill the bracha.
 
PS Despite the thread subject, I do not believe in kinesiology, iridology,  
homeopathy et al.  They may not be A'Z but it is a separate mitzva, very  well 
known, for a Jew to have seichel.

--Toby  Katz
=============



**************Start the year off right.  Easy ways to stay in shape.     
http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp00300000002489
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080113/8a4e9c1b/attachment-0001.html 

http://www.chabad.org/therebbe/article_cdo/aid/529444/jewish/The-Rebbe-and-the-Rav.htm

Below is part of the "transcription" of the You Tube interview of Rav
Kowalsky retelling the event.  He drove Rav Soloveitchil to the shiva.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZOP5WIobI0

As soon as the Rav entered the room, the Lubavitcher Rebbe rose from the low
stool he was sitting on. As the Rebbe sat down again, Rabbi Soloveitchik was
presented with an armchair especially brought in for him to ease his back

On Jan 12, 2008 11:22 PM, Richard Wolpoe <rabbirichwolpoe@gmail.com> wrote:

>   Volume 10 Number 93
>                        Produced: Tue Dec 28  8:41:09 1993 marc shapiro:
>
>
>  He is speaking about
> > R.  Soloveitchik, whom R. Tendler called the greatest Rosh Yeshivah of
> > our generation, whom the Lubavitcher rebbe stood up for etc. etc. May
> > God forgive him for degrading our teacher!
> >
> >
> I was told - and have beenacknowledged of flsit - that when RYDS visisted
> the Rebbe to be menachem Avel the Rebe stood and said we must stand for the
> "gadol hador". Any confirmation of this story?
>
>
>
> --
> Kol Tuv / Best Regards,
> RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com
> see: http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
> _______________________________________________
> Avodah mailing list
> Avodah@lists.aishdas.org
> http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080113/4f877f59/attachment-0001.htm 

*Someone Posted:*
... I heard they converted through the conservative movement. It is
highly
likely that the reason they converted through conservative is that they
didn't know better. It is also highly likely that when they converted
they
did so with full intention to practice halacha 100% (even if they didn't
know quite what that meant). As such it is possible that they are really
Jewish - but I don't know.

*Zev Sero Responded:*
Not if the dayanim were pesulim.  Three hedyotot can convert, even if
they shouldn't, but three apikorsim cannot.

*Response*
I guess this is just the question of whether anyone alive today can be
considered an Apikores or just a Tinok Shenishba. I doubt anyone
involved in
the conversion knew Shas.

[MJE]] Assuming the facts presented--which is obviously a big
assumption--we do not need to go (back) into the Tinok Shenishba issue.
Tinok shenishba may limit culpability in a lot of areas, but it will not
make a m'hallel Shabbat b'farhesia into a kosher dayan.  Now, if the
three dayanim were shomer Shabbat--which even today is a
possibility--that would be a different story, at least to some poskim.

On the other hand, the abudaya might fit the case of ger shenitgeir
l'bein hanochrim of Shabbat 68b, which would seem to be without kosher
dayanim or anything else Jewish, for that matter.  I think this one has
also been discussed here.

Was: [Areivim] Mi Ke'amcho Yisroel...

>Galut is a state, not a location. You can even be in galus while doing
>avodah in the beis hamiqdash. Galus Yavan was entirely during the
>2nd bayis.
>Tir'u baTov!
>-Micha

But to play devil's advocate, Rabbi Henkin in Equality Lost, in his
essay on recognizing Hashem in history, says that those who, in the
effort to reconcile our return to haAretz with the identity of those
who accomplished it, say that we are still in galut, thereby empty the
word galut of meaning.

I don't see how we can call the 2nd Bayit period "galut", unless we
follow Rav Hirsch following Ohr Hashem (and Abarbanel too?) that there
was really only one long exile, punctuated by a short intermission.
But if one sees it as two distinct exiles, then what was galut yavan?
You have galut bavel and galut roma, bli galut yavan.

Galut is most certainly NOT a mere state of mind. Galut means exile,
lack of eretz yisrael, lack of statehood. Obviously, we lack a Temple
and the like, so there is still an element of galut. But all the same,
there is an element of geula. To say that we are in galut without a
"but", is just as wrong as to say we are in geula without a "but".

Anyway, while on the subject of this essay of Rabbi Henkin's...

Rabbi Henkin never says (as far as I recall) whether he believes this
is the beginning of our geula (but he possibly hints at an affirmative
answer, when he says Hashem is returning us to prevent our
destruction/dissolution/cessation/assimilation in(to) chutz
laAretz/galut). What he does say, however, is that one way or another,
it is Hashem's doing, and he compares it to King Whatshisname the
rasha for whom Hashem did a miracle and let him expand the terrority
the northern kingdom. Rabbi Henkin says, the challenge then was to
acknowledge Hashem's hand while nevertheless not saying that if Hashem
did a miracle for him he must be worthy and righteous - the same
challenge we face today regarding the chilonim who built the country.

(At the same time, Rabbi Henkin hints this could very well be not the
final geula, for he notes that only one king later, Assyria conquered
Israel. After the northern kingdom's people refused to avail
themselves of the removal of the blocks to the Beit haMikdash, their
indictment, and Ninevah's zerizut to teshuvah indicting our
stiff-neckedness...and so too today could it happen if we aren't
careful.)

Mikha'el Makovi

Michael Elzufon wrote:

> On the other hand, the abudaya might fit the case of ger shenitgeir
> l'bein hanochrim of Shabbat 68b, which would seem to be without kosher
> dayanim or anything else Jewish, for that matter.  I think this one has
> also been discussed here.

It's first mentioned on 68a, and Tosfot immediately points out that
there must have been three hedyotot to do the conversion, because
without them he wouldn't be Jewish and there'd be nothing to discuss.

-- 
Zev Sero               Something has gone seriously awry with this Court's
zev@sero.name          interpretation of the Constitution.
                       	                          - Clarence Thomas

Prof. Levine wrote:

> Since we are nitpicking, let me point out that Isaac Leeser was not a 
> rabbi. He was the chazzan of Cong. Mikveh Israel. The first ordained 
> Orthodox rabbi to come to America was R. Avraham Rice. He arrived in 1840.

And in 1862 R Bernard Ilowy claimed that "In all of America, which has
more than 200 communities large and small, there are no more than four
ordained rabbis, and three of them are 'mitalmidav shel Bil'am Harasha'
about whom it may be said 'vesalachta la'avoni ki *rav* hu'".

-- 
Zev Sero               Something has gone seriously awry with this Court's
zev@sero.name          interpretation of the Constitution.
                       	                          - Clarence Thomas

R' Richard Wolpoe wrote:
> The point of Hirsh is that one can get a "hispal'us" from
> seeing the Alps or the Grand Canyon and then it is a
> worthwhile endeavor to See HKBH in HIS Greatness in this
> world. it is not about PHYSICAL han'anh it is about
> spirtual inspiration.

So far, we totally agree.

> Just as niggun inspires SOME-  the Alps inspired Hirsch to
> increase his connection with the Divine. Is that so hard to
> understand? So Lemashal if I heard a concert with the music
> of Bach and Mozart and received inspiration it would be like
> Hirsch going to the Alps.

But the niggun is a human creation, and the Alps are a Divine creation. To me, that is gigantic distinction. "Mah rabu maasecha" can easily apply to the Alps. I have no idea how it could apply to a work of human art, except in the most general sense that Hashem gave us the tools to make such art with.

I note that you put emphasis on the word "some", and I am (generally) not among that subset. To me, a niggun can be an enjoyable piece of entertainment, if it is a niggun which I like. Also, if the niggun accompanies lyrics, and the music of the niggun emphasizes those lyrics to make them more understandable or more powerful, then *that* is what I would call an "inspiring" niggun. But otherwise, wordless niggunim just don't "do it" for me. (But I have no complaint against those who *are* inspired by them.)

But ditto in the opposite direction as well. Many years ago, we had a thread --- wow, I just went to look it up. It was in 1999, Avodah volume 3, approx. issues 143-154, under subjects like "Wagner's Music" and "Is all music value-neutral?" Back then I felt, and I still feel today, that while wordless music can give a person a very basic emotional feeling such as calmness or frenzy, I do not see how it can bring one to a higher-lever emotion such as love or hate, and even more so, I do not see how wordless music can inspire one to something like deveykus to Hashem. --- Unless, of course, one has reason to associate that particular niggun with some particular lyrics, in which case it is not really a wordless niggun.

> If a drunk has booze it is a physical pleasure. if a ehrlihcer
> hassid has a schnappes it is a spiritual event.  Simple - no?

No. Not unless that schnappes helped that hassid to some sort of chiddush in learning, or in dveykus, or whatever. Which I freely admit that alcohol *can* help do. But the drinking alone is *not* a spiritual event. And woe to those who think it is.

Akiva Miller
_____________________________________________________________
Click to discover the secret to promoting your business and make millions.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2121/fc/Ioyw6i3m53yuAsCCoEXDPJCRdhxzcEutwpQmKBiml8fr2LDiT73Ksi/

There is a HUGE chiluq whether RMMS said "the gadol hador" or "a gadol
hador". Given the role in Chabad thought of the yechidah kelalis, I
really doubt RMMS could give a non-Chabad rav the title of the
generation's greatest.

SheTir'u baTov!
-micha

-- 
Micha Berger             One who kills his inclination is as though he
micha@aishdas.org        brought an offering. But to bring an offering,
http://www.aishdas.org   you must know where to slaughter and what
Fax: (270) 514-1507      parts to offer.        - R' Simcha Zissel Ziv

Micha Berger wrote:
> There is a HUGE chiluq whether RMMS said "the gadol hador" or "a gadol
> hador".

The cited source, though, doesn't even suggest *any* such language,
never mind subtle chiluqim such as this.


-- 
Zev Sero               Something has gone seriously awry with this Court's
zev@sero.name          interpretation of the Constitution.
                       	                          - Clarence Thomas


------------------------------


Avodah mailing list
Avodah@lists.aishdas.org
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 25, Issue 20
**************************************

Send Avodah mailing list submissions to
	avodah@lists.aishdas.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
	avodah-owner@lists.aishdas.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Avodah digest..."