Avodah Mailing List

Volume 25: Number 221

Sun, 15 Jun 2008

• 1. Re: Kabbalah and Neuroscience (T613K@aol.com)
• 2. Re: An old Pshat and a Question About Milchig on Shavuos (Micha Berger)
• 3. A Majority of World Jewry In Eretz Yisroel (RallisW@aol.com)
• 4. Re: A Majority of World Jewry In Eretz Yisroel (Zev Sero)
• 5. Re: A Majority of World Jewry In Eretz Yisroel (Micha Berger)
• 6. Re: 2nd day Y"T (Richard Wolpoe)
• 7. Re: Did Tziporah say Lashon Hara? (Simon Montagu)
• 8. Halivni's theology (Moshe Feldman)
• 9. Re: An old Pshat and a Question About Milchig on Shavuos (Richard Wolpoe)
• 10. Re: The 10 Dibros are split into 2 x 5 (Richard Wolpoe)
• 11. Tachnun (Cantor Wolberg)
• 12. Re: An old Pshat and a Question About Milchig on Shavuos (Samuel Svarc)

 
 
From: "Moshe Feldman" _moshe.feldman@gmail.com_ 
(mailto:moshe.feldman@gmail.com) 

_http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/992347.html_ 
(http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/992347.html) 


"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...."
 
 
>>>>
Some scientists think that all prophets were actually  epileptics, but I 
don't buy it.  Coming out of an epileptic seizure and  then writing the seforim 
written by Yeshayahu, Yirmiyahu and so on would be like  a modern-day person 
coming out of a seizure speaking in iambic pentameter with  rhyming couplets.
 
OTOH the evidence that Mohammed had epilepsy is strong, and the Koran  
wouldn't be too hard for any modern-day teenager in a trance to write.
 
As for whether kabbalists somehow alter their own brave waves -- well,  
maybe.  


 


--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/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080613/02637637/attachment-0001.htm>

On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 02:03:39AM -0400, Samuel Svarc wrote:
: 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.

The Or Samei'ach says it does. RYGB suggested that perhaps the OS is
only talking bout a mal'akh while in shamayim and that once it's on
shelichus in olam hazeh, it can make wrong choices. Rav Moshe writes
similarly in Derash Moshe (Vayeira).

The Rambam, OTOH, says that even in potential, mal'akhim lack bechirah.
I think the Seforno says it as well on Ber 1:26.

This is discussed at length in the Or Samayach's essay /detour in Hil
Teshuvah title "HaKol Tzafui vehaReshus Nesunah". (As is the question
of bechirah and Hashem's omniscience. A gold mine.) I think he also
discusses it in the Meshekh Chokhmah on Yisro.

There are also discussions amongst the rishonim on Shabbos 88b (where
the mal'akhim want to keep the Torah for themselves, and complain about
that interloper Moshe there to take it).

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             The trick is learning to be passionate in one's
micha@aishdas.org        ideals, but compassionate to one's peers.
http://www.aishdas.org
Fax: (270) 514-1507

What halochos go into effect, once it has been proven that a majority of  
World Jewry reside in Eretz Yisroel? How long do you think it will still be  
before it's a reality?
 
 



**************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/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080613/3b5fc515/attachment-0001.htm>

RallisW@aol.com wrote:
> What halochos go into effect, once it has been proven that a majority of 
> World Jewry reside in Eretz Yisroel? How long do you think it will still 
> be before it's a reality?

Don't you need each shevet on its own land?  Since almost nobody knows
their shevet (and for this purpose Levi literally doesn't count), this
doesn't seem possible.

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

On Fri, June 13, 2008 4:01 pm, Zev Sero wrote:
: RallisW@aol.com wrote:
:> What halochos go into effect, once it has been proven that a
:> majority of
:> World Jewry reside in Eretz Yisroel? How long do you think it will
:> still
:> be before it's a reality?

: Don't you need each shevet on its own land?  Since almost nobody knows
: their shevet (and for this purpose Levi literally doesn't count), this
: doesn't seem possible.

See R' Jacob Farkus's post at
<http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol17/v17n033.shtml#05> where he
corrected me on the very same point WRT yoveil and shemittah. After
all, yoveil deOraisa ended when 2-1/2 shevatim were exiled from Eiver
haYadein, and that was certainly more than 1/2 remaining in Israel!
Tosafos entertains the possibility that perhaps only representatives
of each sheivet need to be on their own land, and therefore there was
yoveil during bayis sheini (and that Raba was suggesting Hillel's
pruzbul applied even though shemittah was at the time deOraisa).

However, that's kol yosheveha aleha. For challah, there is a
requirement of "bevi'as kol ha'aretz -- bevi'as kulkhem". There, a
majority may be sufficient to create the chiyuv deOraisa. So we still
may have issues of terumah and maaser deOraisa as well. RJF's post
doesn't discuss whether or not it's just challah, and I didn't yet
have time to check his sources. I just wanted to point people to them
before Shabbos.

SheTir'u baTov!
-micha

-- 
Micha Berger             "Man wants to achieve greatness overnight,
micha@aishdas.org        and he wants to sleep well that night too."
http://www.aishdas.org     - Rav Yosef Yozel Horwitz, Alter of Novarodok
Fax: (270) 514-1507

On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 7:03 AM, Arie Folger <afolger@aishdas.org> wrote:

> 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
>

It still makes little sense to me
the Minhag Avos HAD to be established at SOME point!
Mah nafsach:

   1. If the Minahg goes back to the era of Olei Regel [which may or may not
   have ended with the hurban] then my original point makes sense.
   2. If the Minhag is only AFTER olay regel then we CERTAINLY cannot prove
   anything about sojourners in Israel during YT one way or the other!

I am really not trying to score points here. I just find the justifications
quite dachuk and problematic and I am sharing with you how that is.  BH i am
not alone, bseids teh hacham Zvi there are many others who share these
doubts re: the consturction of "nos'nim alav humra" of both places IN THIS
SCENARIO.

ASIS the principle simply is not applicable  when the entire minhag is
predicated upon place to being with. It's not like in Gallil they worked
erev YT etc. Thsi is NOT a minhag hamakom! It is a Minhag predicated upon
location for  those with s'feika deyoma EXCEPT for those who hold like the
Rambam that this is a brand new Takkanh/Gzeira regardless of the minhag - a
position rejected by most pos'kim

-- 
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/20080613/981af018/attachment-0001.htm>

On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 6:47 PM, kennethgmiller@juno.com
<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? And if it was, then are there any Chazals which take Tziporah to task for this?

As I read it, Tzipora was talking to herself and Miriam happened to
overhear. This seems implicit in the lashon of the midrash.

From http://www.forward.com/articles/13553/  (article about Halivni's theology):
<<The ontological absence of God during the Holocaust was, in other
words, preceded by a long history of eclipses of God's will from what
Orthodox Jews fervently believe to be Judaism's immaculate, revealed
sacred texts, both divine and rabbinic. Halivni's most scholarly and
original contributions to talmudical studies point to the many "bumps
and fissures" in Jewish sacred literature and as such have served,
quite deliberately, to undermine the religious authoritarianism and
maximal claims to access to divine wisdom on the part of the experts
in these very texts, namely, the rabbis.
>>

Rabbi Dr. Yaakov Elman (who teaches Talmudic Criticism at Bernard
Revel) accepts the notion that many of our texts have been corrupted
or misinterpreted, but reconciles that with his fealty to Halacha by
drawing the exact opposite conclusion of that of Halvni.  Based on R.
Tzadok HaCohen (can anyone provide a cite?), Dr. Elman says that
Hashem deliberately caused these textual problems in order to allow
for Halacha to develop differently over time than the way originally
envisioned by the Tannaim.

Shavua tov.
Moshe

On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 12:02 PM, Meir Rabi <meirabi@optusnet.com.au> wrote:

> The Malochim protested that the Jews should not be given the Torah. Moshe
> Rabbenu told them that they had eaten Basar BeChalav when they visited
> Avraham Avinu and that silenced them. [Clearly a different approach to that
> of Rashi on the Chumash] The Meshech Chochmah explains the exchange between
> did their transgression disqualify their protest?
> MR and the Malochim.
>
>
> Has anyone considered that this is a MASHAL  to explain how the Torah is
not in Shamayim anymore and may have never literally happened - and
therefore would have ZERO impact on how Mal'achim ACTUALLY behave?



-- 
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/20080615/019a17dd/attachment-0001.htm>

On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 2:46 AM, Arie Folger <afolger@aishdas.org> wrote:

> Rabausai,
>
> It is well known that one way to analyze the 10 dibrot is that they consist
> of
> 5 bein adam laMaqom and 5 bein adam le'havero. While I did find the
> division
> of the dibrot into 5+5 in massekhet Sheqalim daf khaf vav (IIRC) and in the
> Yalqut Shim'oni parsaht Terumah ?368, they do not mention the BAL'H vs.
> BALM
> distinction. The earliest source I found so far is the Ramban on lo
> tirtza'h
> in the dibrot of Parshat Yitro (passuq 13).
>
> Does anyone know of an earlier source than the Ramban for this analysis?
>
> KT,
> --
> Arie Folger
>  <http://www.ariefolger.googlepages.com>


FWIW
If, you follow the 9-10 parsha breaks as in the Masoretric text
Then you can make a case for 4and 6.
I.E. Lo sachmos is TWO and anochi and Lo Yihye are really one [iow NO BREAK]

-- 
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/20080615/29aa25b7/attachment-0001.htm>

Akiva Miller wrote: 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"?

"Until" the 13th in this case does not mean "including" the 13th.

When the Beis Hamidash stood and all Jews would come there for the  
Shalosh Regalim, Sivan 12 was the last of the seven days allotted for  
the korbonos brought in conjunction with the Shavuos pilgrimage  
(unlike the 7-day festivals of Pesach and Succos, Shavuos consists  
only of one day; hence the additional six days of tashlumin).

Thus we do not recite the tachnun and the other prayers omitted on a  
festival or joyous commemoration, from the 1st of Sivan until and  
including the 12th, as all these days bear a connection with the  
festival of Shavuos.  We resume the tachnun, therefore, on the 13th.  
(However, I believe there are places that "include" the 13th).

ri

> Subject: Re: [Avodah] An old Pshat and a Question About Milchig on
>    Shavuos

>    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

I must say that I'm very surprised. "Not reality"? When you bite into a
fruit tree's bark you taste any fruity flavors? It was a direct command from
HKB"H that in reality was disobeyed. If you eliminate the freewill from the
malachim then instead you're saying that HKB"H is the one who fights with
himself. So I guess that a triumvirate G-D is OK according to your m'halech
(sounds like Christian theology to me, but maybe there are people who hold
like that). And pray tell, what are the malachim worried about that we
should say "v'malachim yo'chifazon'. And if the nifilim were changed in that
they were given freewill and lack of it is a defining aspect of being a
malach then as I see it, HKB"H didn't really show anything by switching them
out of being what they were before.

KT,
MSS



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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 25, Issue 221
***************************************

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..."