Avodah Mailing List

Volume 25: Number 220

Fri, 13 Jun 2008

• 1. Kabbalah and Neuroscience (Moshe Feldman)
• 2. Re: 2nd day Y"T (Arie Folger)
• 3. Re: An old Pshat and a Question About Milchig on Shavuos (Rich, Joel)
• 4. Re: Did Tziporah say Lashon Hara? (Rich, Joel)
• 5. Re: Did Tziporah say Lashon Hara? (Zev Sero)
• 6. Re: Tachnun (kennethgmiller@juno.com)
• 7. Re: [Areivim] Haaretz: building settlement by non-Jewish workers permitted on Shabbat (Zev Sero)
• 8. Re: Did Tziporah say Lashon Hara? (T613K@aol.com)

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/992347.html
Excerpt:
<<These examples clearly demonstrate that major trends in Jewish mysticism
were based on repeatedly practicing techniques that led to experiences which
challenged the habitual perception of the mystic's own body and self, such
as seeing his "double" or disengaging from his body during "ascent of the
soul."

The above mentioned techniques are not at all simple to perform, and require
years of practice which do not always bear fruit. Why, therefore, did these
prominent kabbalists invest so much time and effort in these practices? The
kabbala saw in the "human soul" a "divine spark," "part of the divine
above." Therefore, to understand God, the mystic could study the "divine
spark" within by introspectively studying himself. Mystics and philosophers
throughout the generations utilized ecstatic states to understand the "self"
as well as the relationship between body and mind. Literally, the term
"ex-stasis" means "standing outside" the body. Accordingly, ecstatic states
include autoscopy (seeing one's body from outside); "ascent of the soul" (an
out-of-body experience, mostly accompanied by paranormal encounters with
celestial beings); "Maggid" or a "dybbuk" (possession of one's body by an
external "personality"); and "uni-mystica" (the experience of mystical union
with the divine). The "ascent of the soul" is therefore a state in which the
"self" separates from the body and allows the mystic to look within each of
these components in turn, attempting to understand their individual
functions. The autoscopic experiences as described by Abulafia's circle also
refers to another autoscopic body: Between that body and his own physical
body, the mystic can "move" his sense of "self" and thus peruse even more
closely the boundaries of the body, the "soul" and the "self."

A study of reports of patients suffering from lesions in the junction of the
brain's temporal and parietal lobes (temporoparietal junction), as well as
of people whose brains are electrically stimulated during surgical
procedures, reveal experiences that challenge the ordinary perception of the
body and the self, experiences that are similar to the reports of various
mystics, research that were described. Increased activity in the
temporoparietal junction was also found in experiments involving healthy
subjects who practiced tasks similar to those cited by the abovementioned
mystics. This brain mechanism was found to play a central role in the
integration of various kinds of input from the body, as well as in higher
cognitive functions involving the body and the self.

Such experiments may also explain the differences between various
kabbalistic techniques and the experiences they evoke. In an experiment
described in a recent edition of the Journal of Neuroscience, subjects were
presented with schematic human figures in different positions. In one task,
they were asked to imagine that the schematic figure was their own
reflection in a mirror, and in another task, they were asked to imagine
themselves in the position of the human figure - and from these points of
view, to perform different judgment about the presented figure. Notably, in
the first task, subjects saw themselves from their habitual point of view,
embodied within their physical body, similar to descriptions of Abulafia's
technique ("as if seeing himself in a mirror"). In the other task, subjects
came "out" of their bodies (disembodiment), and looked at themselves and the
world from that perspective - as did those who followed the teachings of the
Lurianic kabbala and early Hasidism ("and he will imagine himself as if his
soul has gone out and ascended").

*Activation of the brain *

Electrical neuroimaging revealed that different brain activities correlate
to these tasks. While in the first task (embodied self-location), activation
was found in the left extrastriate body area (EBA) of the brain, the second
task (disembodied self-location) was associated with activity in the right
temporoparietal junction. These findings are compatible with the role of
these brain mechanisms: extrastriate body area is involved with
visualization and imagination of bodies and of body parts, and therefore it
is active in an experience that is mainly visual, like autoscopy; the
temporoparietal junction is involved in multisensory coding and higher
processing of the human body and self, and thus involved in the sense of
disembodiment. The special function of the right hemisphere, which allows
people to imagine their body in numerous and sundry variations, including
from outside of it, can also be seen here. The left hemisphere is more
involved with the common visual basis of the phenomenon, as well as
Abulafia's technique of letter combinations, since the mechanism involved in
reading is located nearby.

Moreover, application of electrical neuroimaging on these two tasks while in
supine or sitting positions revealed that body position influences the sense
of embodiment. This is in keeping with the fact that neurological patients
describe out-of-body experiences as occurring while they are reclining,
while autoscopy occurs mostly in a sitting position. It also conforms to the
fact that Abulafia's techniques as performed mainly in a sitting position,
while those of the Lurianic kabbala and Hasidism were done in a supine
position.>>

Comments?

Kol tuv,
Moshe
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20080613/5a923ed6/attachment.htm>

RRW wrote:
> And to think about it, Olei Regel from Bavel, would THEY observe YT Sheini?
> I kinda doubt it . It seems logical to say that once in the prcincts of EY
> the s'feika deyoma is not operative. But I do concede that the poskim
> seemed to have ignored this principle.

The statement re: YT2 shel galuyot that hizharu beminhag avoteikhem only 
appeared long after the 'hurban, hence the question could not have been asked 
on a practical level. May it however soon be, soon, bimheirah beyamenu.

KT, GS,

-- 
Arie Folger
http://www.ariefolger.googlepages.com

 

        >> The Malochim protested that the Jews should not be given the
Torah.

        > ===================================

        > 

        > 

        > And this you understood? Do malachim have free will to protest
hkb"h's 

        > actions?

        > KT

        > Joel Rich

         

        Why would you think otherwise? Besides for all the places where
it says that they did actually disobey or could (fruit trees, by kol
nidrei, etc.), what is the sevara not that way? AFAIK, only that the
malachs knowledge is on a much clearer level, but this doesn't preclude
them from choosing to disobey.

         

        KT,

        MSS 

         =====================================

        OK, different strokes for different folks. So warring factions
of angels and HKB"H taking sides and angels refusing to do HKB"H's will
would be OK according to your mehalech (sounds parallel to Greek
mythology but I've always been confused by "angels" in tanach vs..
talmud). I was taught "angels"  were beings without free will who did
HKB"H's single and direct command and that any "counterexamples" that I
pointed out needed to be understood as lessons not reality.

         

        KT
        Joel Rich

THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE 
ADDRESSEE.  IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL 
INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE.  Dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 
strictly prohibited.  If you received this message in error, please notify us 
immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message.  
Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20080613/b442f359/attachment.htm>

Rashi (B'haalos'cha 12:1) quotes Rabi Nasan: "Miriam was at Tziporah's
side when they told Moshe, 'Eldad and Medad are having nevuah in the
camp.' When Tziporah heard, she said, 'Oy to their wives! If they get
nevuah, they'll separate from their wives, like my husband separated
from me.' That's how Miriam knew."

Was it Lashon Hara for Tziporah to say this to Miriam? It sure sounds
like a complaint to me.

If it was not LH, why not? And if it was, then are there any Chazals
which take Tziporah to task for this?

Akiva Miller



____________________________________________________________
Who did she say it to?  
Did a Navi have to ask reshut from his wife (as someone being asked to
be nasi would) to take the position?  If so, there would certainly be
toelet!

KT
Joel Rich
THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE 
ADDRESSEE.  IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL 
INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE.  Dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 
strictly prohibited.  If you received this message in error, please notify us 
immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message.  
Thank you.

kennethgmiller@juno.com wrote:
> Rashi (B'haalos'cha 12:1) quotes Rabi Nasan: "Miriam was at Tziporah's
> side when they told Moshe, 'Eldad and Medad are having nevuah in the
> camp.' When Tziporah heard, she said, 'Oy to their wives! If they get
> nevuah, they'll separate from their wives, like my husband separated
> from me.' That's how Miriam knew."
> 
> Was it Lashon Hara for Tziporah to say this to Miriam? It sure sounds like a complaint to me.
> 
> If it was not LH, why not?

Because she thought that was simply how it was with all nevi'im; that
once Hashem spoke to them they could no longer return to their wives
(or, presumably, their husbands).  Either she was unaware that Miriam
was a nevi'ah, or she thought Miriam was also living apart from Kalev.
She thought she was merely stating an uncontroversial fact, that there
was a downside to nevu'ah, that it's not necessarily a wonderful thing
to become a navi.  She wasn't to know that Moshe's nevu'ah was different
than any other.


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

Cantor Wolberg asked:<cantorwolberg@cox.net>
> Do any of you not say tachnun until the 13th?

I find the word "until" to be very ambiguous. If a siddur says to skip
tachanun "until the 13th", does that mean "skip it for a while and start
again on the 13th", or does it mean "skip it until and including the 13th"?

According to the Sefer Eretz Yisrael by Rav Yechiel Michel Tukachinsky,
page 66: (A PDF of this sefer is available at http:/
/www.teachittome.com/seforim2/seforim/eretz_yisrael.pdf; then go to
page 35.)

"Nohagin kan she'ayn omrim tachanun ad yud-gimel sivan, haynu od shiv'a
l'tashlumin l'yom hachag. --- The minhag here is not to say tachanun until
Sivan 13, that is another seven days of make-up for the day of the
holiday."

I interpret this to mean that "here" (i.e., in Eretz Yisrael), they of
course omit tachanun on Sivan 6 (being Shavuos), and also omit it for "od -
another" seven days, being Sivan 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13, and start
saying it again on Sivan 14.

The word "tashlumin - make-up" presumably refers to the seven days after
Shavuos during which one can still do the mitzvah of Aliyah L'Regel. If
there are shuls which omit tachanun on Sivan 12 but do say it on Sivan 13,
it suppose it is because their rabbis hold that Aliyah L'Regel can only be
done for seven days *including* yom tov, and not for seven days *after* yom
tov.

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
Beauty Product Reviews
Read Unbiased Beauty Product Reviews and Join Our Product Review Team!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc
/JKFkuJi7UvsY2aUfHIlYTcshmK05FgqvT5Q4MGndal1HxSCmubS8DA/

On Areivim, Moshe Feldman wrote:
> http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/992214.html

> Gisser said there have been previous cases in which such halakhic
> sanctions were granted for settlements in the territories. As for the
> halakhic reasoning, Gisser cited a Talmudic ruling (in Tractate Gittin)
> that says that the commandment to settle the land of Israel overrides
> the principle of not engaging non-Jews to work on Shabbat.

This seems like an open-and-shut halacha.  If an opportunity to buy land
in EY from a goy arises on Shabbat, and after Shabbat it may no longer
be available, one may tell the goy to write the contract and register it
with the government (i.e. to do melachot de'oraita), because mitzvat
Yishuv EY overrides the prohibition on Amira Lenochri (or rather because
the Chachamim didn't forbid AlN when it would interfere with YEY).
This is brought lema'aseh in SA OC 306:11, and in SAH 306:24, and I'm
not aware of anyone who disputes it.  The MA cites the Rambam that this
applies even to areas that do not have kedushat haAretz.

I don't see any meaningful distinction between the classic case and the
one in Ofra.  If these buildings are not completed as quickly as possible,
the Court may stop construction altogether.  Surely this is exactly the
sort of situation for which Chazal created this exception to the law of
Amira Lenochri, and R Gisser is 100% correct in permitting it.  I don't
understand the objections that the article claims are being made to this
heter.

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

 
 
From: "kennethgmiller@juno.com" _kennethgmiller@juno.com_ 
(mailto:kennethgmiller@juno.com) 

>> When Tziporah heard, she said, 'Oy to their wives! If  they get nevuah, 
they'll separate from their wives, like my husband separated  from me.' That's 
how Miriam knew."

Was it Lashon Hara for Tziporah to say  this to Miriam? It sure sounds like a 
complaint to  me.<<

>>>>>
Tzippora was not complaining about or criticizing Moshe's behavior.   She 
took it for granted that a navi must separate from his wife, like a law of  
nature.  That is no more LH than saying, "Oy, if my husband gets drafted  he'll 
have to separate from me and go to the army."
 
It was Miriam who turned it into a criticism of Moshe in her own mind,  
because according to her opinion, it was /not/ necessary for a navi to separate  
from his wife.  (And in general, she would have been right,  except that Moshe 
was no ordinary navi.) (Ha, as if there's such a thing as an  "ordinary" navi)  
 
 
Tzippora was just temimusdik and didn't question the need for her husband  to 
separate from her, assuming that was what all nevi'im did.    Tzippora was a 
giyores and this makes me think of the way  gerim are often much more 
temimusdik and accepting than are born Jews,  who are much more inclined to argue and 
debate and ask, "But /why/ do you  have to do it that way?" and "Who /says/ 
that's the only way?"  yada  yada. 



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






**************Vote for your city's best dining and nightlife. City's Best 
2008.      (http://citysbest.aol.com?ncid=aolacg00050000000102)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20080613/2cf501c7/attachment.htm>

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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 25, Issue 220
***************************************

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..."