Avodah Mailing List

Volume 25: Number 166

Mon, 05 May 2008

• 1. Re: 2 days yomtov (Richard Wolpoe)
• 2. Re: Tfillin?chol hamoed (Richard Wolpoe)
• 3. Re: size of a kezayit (Richard Wolpoe)
• 4. Miracles Never Cease to Amaze Me (Cantor Wolberg)
• 5. Re: Who is the father redux - from R' Aviner (David Eisen)
• 6. Re: Miracles Never Cease to Amaze Me (Moshe Y. Gluck)
• 7. Re: Miracles Never Cease to Amaze Me (menucha)
• 8. Re: Tfillin?chol hamoed (Zev Sero)

On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 6:43 AM, Eli Turkel <eliturkel@gmail.com> wrote:

> <<I am fuzzy about this.  makom shemagi'im went at least a 10 day hourney
> BEYIOND the borders of EY.  So even if Eilat was NOT in EY  proper it
> would
> still not have had a minhag avos to have 2 days of YT!>>
>
> The accepted halacha is that 1 or 2 days yomtov depends only on EY and
> not on where
> the shelichim reached. Hence R. Elyashiv (and I heard RAL) pasken that
> Eilat has
> a halacha of chutz la-aretz and requires 2 days yomtov. Needless to
> say this is not
> the minhag of most people who leave or visit Eilat.


The criterai of Shas is "minhag avoseinu beyadeinu"
If you use the borders of EY as a practical proxy for the original Talmudic
norm then I woudl simply suggest revising that to a pragmatic use of the
medina's borders.

IOW maf nafsahch. If the original criteria has morphed then morph it again
to make it more practical



>
> kol tuv
>
> --
> Eli Turkel
>



-- 
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/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080504/122e516d/attachment-0001.htm>

On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 6:21 AM, Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org> wrote:

> On Thu, May 01, 2008 at 12:30:05AM -0400, Richard Wolpoe wrote:
> : My issue with this is that any traditional Ps'ak with any amount of
> : consensus  can be overturned by "rayyos" from the Gemara.
> :
> : I'm not accusing the GRA of abusing this prvilege, but I am saying that
> this
> : started imho a very slippery slope.
>
> The process as a whole is conserved by later generations (in the Gra's
> case, the CI is an example; but I heard the same of the Besh"t)
> declaring him a throwback to the rishonim. Thus, the Gra can go back to
> the gemara and pasqen directly,

 <snip>

>
> -Micha
>


AFAIK RMF and Mesharshal did, too. Bach to a lesser extent

Bu my point is whether you accept R. Y Karo Rema or even Levush they all
rejected to the Back to the Talmud movement. It seems to me that this is a
nimnu bv'gamru by klla Yisroel that there was a hasssimas harishonim

The Idea of the Gra being a trhwoback sounds like an after the fact
justification rationalization rather than a really good Halachic structure.

Let's extrapolate; Since Behag is "bar Samcha" and Divrei kabablh then make
HIM a throwback to the Amora'aim?  Then of course how come Rambam and
Tosafos argue on Behag?  Anwwer?  he is NOT a trhowback DESPITE being a Bar
Samcha etc.

You have a mah nafsach at work here:

Either you hold from closure of an era:
OR
you hold from hasima of th Talmud itself and nothing else

This is the criticism I have about th Orthodox Halachic proceses not
adhering to a consistent model.

It seems to me that RY/Rema and the Advent of the SA as the end of an era.
You could shlug up acharonim with Rishonim but you do not pasken from the
Gmara anymore. The SA more or less coidifes this in Ch.  25:1 when he adds
Poskim to the list of normative books.
[See Rema for possible exceptions]

Rare is the poseik that sticks to a consistent method.

That said let me add the following:

   1. I don't see any problem arguing against Halachic precedent from an
   academic perpsective
   2. I don't see any heter for using arguments to uproot [universally?]
   accept [praxis

Take these 2 rules and you can go back and question the Mishna itself and
every text from then on.

But you have no permission to change the Halachah based merely upon Kushyos.
The Aruch Hashulchan seesm to have broken this rule re: breaking a fast
after shek'iah. Usually he does not step over that line

The BY over-ruled his Beisd din to pasken 3 matzos isntead of 2. {yeah there
I go again]

So my problem is not with the GRA trying to shlug up an accepted practice in
his sefer, my problem is PASKENING like that upshlug when the Halacha has
already been firrnly set into place. Im kein, ein ledavar sof .   That means
there is no Halachah that is NOT subject to revision.

The Taz in O. Ch. 46 re: hanoesin Layo'eif Ko'ach gives an apporach that
sort of goes along with this.

But frankly the entire Ashkenzic structure is based upon Precdeent over
fundamental text with rare exceptions

-- 
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/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080504/fe19eb43/attachment-0001.htm>

On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 1:38 PM, kennethgmiller@juno.com <
kennethgmiller@juno.com> wrote:

>
> Okay, let's put that aside for a moment, and look at something else:
>
> MB 208:48 says that if one makes a food from flour, honey, and spices,
> only the flour counts towards the kezayis for an Al Hamichya; if one eats
> exactly a kezayis of it, one should only say a Boray Nefashos, because he
> did not have a kezayis of flour. He concedes that the popular practice
> ("nohagin haolam") is to count the other ingredients towards the kezayis,
> but says that "lechatchila tov lizaher" to make sure that there is a kezayis
> of flour [for the Al Hamichya].
>
> Akiva Miller



Given: Legabei bracha rishonah we have ikkar and tafeil.
Why is this not true for bracah acharona

E.G. [ma'aseh kd'deira]  If I eat a k'zayiis of mac and cheese, why is the
chees [which is bateil to the macaraoni] not mitztarefi lehsi'ur for a
bracha acharona?

As we know all ingredients are mitztareif for Pas habba bekisnin.  Why is
this different than a vailla case of bracha acharona? Why are not all
ingredients that are tafeil counted?


-- 
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/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080504/520bf76f/attachment-0001.htm>

The following Midrash from Yalkut Shimoni Exodus 176 is somewhat  
troubling:

"Though Pharaoh accompanied his army when they went after Bnai  
Yisroel, he
did not go into the sea and drown, but instead  made his way to  
Nineveh, Assyria,
where he became king?the same king who when hearing the prophet  
Jonah's message
from God foretelling Nineveh's destruction, encouraged all his  
subjects to repent in order
to avert the divine decree."

If someone in contemporary times wrote a Midrash stating that God had  
spared Hitler so
that he could encourage others to do teshuva, we wouldn't take too  
well to it. Aren't there
plenty of tzaddikim who could encourage their people to repent?Also,  
aren't there plenty of
non Jews, such as the Pope, who could encourage their people to  
repent. Why use a rasha?

Of course, a Midrash doesn't mean it really is so, but nevertheless,  
the mindset of those who
wrote the Midrash is very puzzling to me. I just wonder what they were  
thinking
and how their minds worked.

Looking at it from the other side, it is true that there are  
terrorists today who did a total turn
around and go around preaching peace and risk their lives constantly.  
Walid Shoebat, former
terrorist turned Zionist, comes to mind.

I guess then, one way to look at those who wrote the Midrash in  
question, were the ultimate and
quintessential optimists.

Kol tuv.
ri
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080504/2ebd8e54/attachment-0001.htm>

A few questions come to mind: 

If, nonetheless, the sperm is defrosted and the child is born:

1. Does the baby inherit his father's estate upon birth? 
2. Is he a kohen if his deceased father was one? 
3. Does the child say kadish on the yahrzteit of the father he never
knew? 
4. If the parents had been childless before this post-mortem birth, is
the mother no longer zekuka l'yibum/haliltza?

>>>>>>>
Q: Is it permissible for a widow to become impregnated by the frozen
sperm of her deceased husband?
 

RRW:
If someone in contemporary times wrote a Midrash stating that God had spared
Hitler so?
that he could encourage others to do?teshuva, we wouldn't take too well to
it. Aren't there?
plenty of tzaddikim who could encourage their people to repent?Also, aren't
there plenty of?
non Jews, such as the Pope, who could encourage their?people to repent.?Why
use a rasha??
<SNIP>

The same theme is echoed in the Chazal that Nevuchadnezzar did Teshuvah. If
anything, it is a message that we should be OK with a Hitler who did
Teshuvah, and that if their Teshuva is accepted ours also will. Of course,
anyone who accepts that Kriyas Yam Suf happened as described in the Chumash,
shouldn't - IMHO - have an intellectual difficulty accepting at least the
possibility that this related Midrash was originally an oral tradition of an
actual event. If that were the case, it would be very understandable why the
Rasha was used. 
(I still want to resuscitate the Vashti's tail thread, but two things are
stopping me: The penultimate chapter of R'n Simi Peter's excellent book,
which I've begun multiple times (and still haven't returned to her nephew
:-(  ), and the lack of time to go back over last year's threads. Maybe this
will do it...)

KT,
MYG 

The fact is it worked.  The people of Ninve did amazingly immediate 
teshuva. 
Doing teshuva because of "so what happened to them won't happen to me" 
is in keeping with the theme of the Torah reading of Yom Kippur as in 
the first Rashi in Achrei Mot.
(I think this might be hinted to in the beginning of the kria for mincha 
(kemaaseh eretz mitzraim.....)
menucha

Cantor Wolberg wrote:

> The following Midrash from Yalkut Shimoni Exodus 176 is somewhat 
> troubling:
>
> "Though Pharaoh accompanied his army when they went after Bnai 
> Yisroel, he 
> did not go into the sea and drown, but instead  made his way 
> to Nineveh, Assyria, 
> where he became king?the same king who when hearing the 
> prophet Jonah's message 
> from God foretelling Nineveh's destruction, encouraged all his 
> subjects to repent in order 
> to avert the divine decree."
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080505/098ad6f5/attachment-0001.htm>

Richard Wolpoe wrote:

> The Idea of the Gra being a trhwoback sounds like an after the fact 
> justification rationalization rather than a really good Halachic structure.
> 
> Let's extrapolate; Since Behag is "bar Samcha" and Divrei kabablh then 
> make HIM a throwback to the Amora'aim?  Then of course how come Rambam 
> and Tosafos argue on Behag?  Anwwer?  he is NOT a trhowback DESPITE 
> being a Bar Samcha etc.

"Rav tanna hu upalig", but Amoraim were still allowed to argue with Rav.
Similarly outstanding Acharonim such as the GRA and the SA Harav count
as Rishonim for the purpose of allowing them to argue against Rishonim,
but not for the purpose of not allowing Acharonim to argue with them.

(The Rogachover did not learn Acharonim at all, but he did learn the
AR, saying that he was a Rishon.)

- Zev in Singapore

-- 
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 166
***************************************

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..."