Avodah Mailing List

Volume 25: Number 236

Wed, 02 Jul 2008

• 1. Re: Love of the Imahos [was: Your brother's a Mumar; here's the solution!] (Yitzhak Grossman)
• 2. Cohen Gadol, Pubescent Girl & Rav Kook (Yaacov Shulman)
• 3. Re: Taxes (Yitzhak Grossman)
• 4. Re: TIDE and Austritt (Samuel Svarc)
• 5. Bach or Beethoven (from areivim) (saul mashbaum)
• 6. Re: Science and Truth (T613K@aol.com)
• 7. the cohen gadol and marriage to a pubescent girl (Joseph Kaplan)
• 8. Re: the cohen gadol and marriage to a pubescent girl (T613K@aol.com)
• 9. Re: the cohen gadol and marriage to a pubescent girl (T613K@aol.com)

On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 09:35:21 EDT
T613K@aol.com wrote:

> From: Yitzhak Grossman _celejar@gmail.com_ (mailto:celejar@gmail.com) 
> 
> >>But note  that none of the Imahos are described as loving their  husbands.<<
> 
> >>>>>
> Hello?   Leah?!

Where does the Torah state, or even imply, that she loved him?

> The poignancy of that whole situation has often struck me.  Leah and  Rochel 
> each had what the other most desperately longed for.  And both were  left with 
> thwarted longings that were never quite fulfilled.  
>  
> All her life Leah longed for her husband's love -- every one of her sons  was 
> named with reference to this longing!  And when Rochel died -- Yakov  /still/ 

It is clear that she was dissatisfied with his level of affection for
her, but that doesn't necessarily imply that she loved him.  A married
woman may desire her husband's love, and certainly feel mortified at
being hated or disliked ('snuah')  without necessarily loving him.
I do see your point, though.  It is clear that she was not indifferent
to him.

> didn't make Leah's tent his primary abode, but instead put his bed in  
> Bilhah's tent.  Leah's pain over this situation must have been  palpable -- it 
> induced her son Reuven to interfere on his mother's behalf  and try to get his 
> father, finally, to make Leah his primary wife -- but  Reuven's plans backfired.

The story may indicate her or her son's sense of humiliation at being
passed over for a maidservant, rather than her feelings of unrequited
love.

> When you think about the whole "dudaim" story it's all there -- the whole  
> heartbreak, the pain on both sides.  

Acutely stated.

> Rochel:  "Your little boy brought you flowers?  Please, I have  no little 
> boy, could I please just have those flowers?"
>  
> Leah:  "What do I care about the flowers?  My husband doesn't  love me, he 
> loves you, but please, could I just have this one night with  him?"
>  
> Yes, I know that Yakov did love Leah too, but relatively, she felt  unloved.  
> Rochel was always his true zivug and his true wife, which he  mentioned even 
> on his deathbed, so many years after Rochel's death.

> --Toby Katz

Yitzhak
--
Bein Din Ledin - bdl.freehostia.com
An advanced discussion of Hoshen Mishpat

Hello!

My thanks to everyone who has responded to my posting on the cohen gadol and
the pubescent girl. Please forgive me if I don't respond in turn to specific
points that different individuals made.

In regard to the idea of "sensitivity" and the like, I want to quote a
passage from Rav Kook. There he is speaking about a different topic?Jews and
non-Jews. But his proposed methodology of thought is, I think apropos.
Basically, he states that many morally-problematical teachings that appear
in the Torah are "stumblingblocks," and that it is our role to interpret
them, even against the simple meaning that they present.

There, Rav Kook is saying that a person should have a "love for humanity"
that comes from his inner "well of kindness." I am positing in this case
that a person should have a discomfort with the idea of a 12 year old girl
marrying an adult.

I'm not arguing, by the way, that darkei noam always has the last word. I am
wondering why, here, it doesn't seem to have any word.

At any rate, here is the quote of Rav Kook:

The Liberated Light

From the well of kindness, your love for humanity must burst forth?not as an
unreasoned commandment, for then it would lose the most clear aspect of its
brilliance, but as a powerful movement of the spirit within you.

This love must withstand very difficult challenges.  It must overcome many
contradictions, which are scattered like boulders upon which you may
stumble.  These are found in isolated Torah statements, in the superficial
aspect of some Torah laws, and in a multitude of points of view that stem
from the constriction within the revealed aspect of the Torah and the
national ethical sense.

It is clear that when the love of humanity grows remote from its divine
source, its blossom withers.

And the divine source expresses its light through the conduits of Torah and
mitzvah, and through the definition of the Jewish nation as unique.

All this requires the effort of a great spirit: how to maintain these
conduits where they stand, and yet draw the waters of kindness in their
original purity and breadth.

Again and again, we must descend to the depths of darkness in order to
excavate--precisely from there--the most liberated light, the greatest and
most elevated.
Orot Hakodesh III, p. 318

-- 
Yaacov David Shulman
Translator; Editor; Ghostwriter
Specializing in Torah and literary texts
freewebs.com/jewish-spiritual-and-beautiful
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080702/49dd74bb/attachment-0001.htm>

On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 14:29:08 -0400
Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org> wrote:

> DDD applies to the law as practiced, not as codified. And while there

Source?  I've seen this claim, but I know of no authoritative source
for it.

> -Micha

Yitzhak
--
Bein Din Ledin - bdl.freehostia.com
An advanced discussion of Hoshen Mishpat

> From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
> 
> ... MSS:
> : To me it is clear, after reading R' Elias ;) and Collected Writings,
that
> : [TIDE and Austritt] are inextricably linked. It is a clear outgrowth of
the  > : need for the
> : Torah to reign supreme in all areas, including communal as well.
> 
> : However, the question of his reaction to Israel is more complicated, and
> : I
> : won't venture a guess as to where he would of ended up. Someplace on the
> : spectrum from Brisk (total Austritt) to Agudah (ideological Austritt but
> : pragamatic cooperation), where exactly I don't know.
> 
> It seems to me that while in your first paragraph you say that it's
> clear that TiDE implies Austritt, regardless of which community it is
> you're walking away from, in your second paragraph you open the door to
> the possibility of cooperation on non-Torah matters.

TIDE requires Austritt. If one recognizes something other than Torah then
the Torah in TIDE is not reigning supreme.

As for the "possibility of cooperation on non-Torah matters", this is
something that needs more detail to be answered intelligently. Oh' and TIDE
doesn't recognize any "Non-Torah matters", as all of DE is part of the
rubric on which Torah must be the master of.

 
> RYBS's midpoint answer also insists on a society in which Torah reigns
> supreme. However, it does so without cutting themselves off from the
> non-observant world in matters in which that allegiance isn't threatened.

I'm no expert on RYBS, so no comment.

> On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 10:05:54AM -0400, T613K@aol.com wrote:
> : If you are asking whether austritt was a hora'as sha'ah -- no, I really
> : don't think so.
> 
> Not really. I'm asking whether Austritt means a rejection of a particular
> kind of anti-O community, one that does not describe today's pathetic
> legacy of that community.

(R' Micha then describes the historical situation in Germany in relation to
the R & O communities.)

The beauty of RSRH's torah is that he didn't address certain situations and
build things on them. He built edifices of thought based on what the Torah
says, and with that addressed situations. So the answer is: No. Austritt is
not bound to one particular situation but rather that nothing may reduce
Torah's dominion. On which side of the line a situation lies is the rub. So
the particulars are not always easy to figure. But the principle is crystal
clear and is *not* based on the particular historical situation of eighteen
hundred Frankfurt.

> 
> : I admit that that whole last paragraph has no source other than my gut
> : feeling, based on the emanations of penumbras from the corpus of
> : Hirsch's writings.
> 
> WADR, though, you already "admitted" a few weeks backthat your view
> of TiDE is based on the assumption that your father (note to newbies:
> RNBulman) "channeled" RSRH. OTOH, I can not picture someone of your
> gather's stature adopting someone else's hashkafah wholesale, with no
> personalization.

So which points do you think RNB personalized, and what is your evidence for
those points? Lacking those, it appears that your intent is more to
disqualify RTK from basically ever voicing an opinion on TIDE (as opposed to
just straight quoting from RSRH), with the handy rebuttal, "That's RNB not
TIDE".

> Therefore, without a source in RSRH, I'm compelled to assume you're
> really describing RNB's TiDE, not RSRH's.

Even when two separate people (one of whom never heard RNB) give essentially
the same answer? Something is compelling, but I think it's more your desire
to find Austritt amenable to certain participations with non-O communities.

KT,
MSS

On areivim, RMB discussed Bach versus Beethoven:
>>
This makes Bach the more frum of the pair, because like frum Jews, his achievements unfolded within a
set of rules.

I am also reminded of RSRH on "noi techeiles" -- and Rashi applies it to
tzitzis even without techeiles -- "shelish gedil ushenei shelishei anaf"
(Menachos 39a). RSRH writes that halakhah channels man's creativity by
binding it in sky-blue, in sanctity. However, only 1/3 of the cord is
bound. Human growth, the tzitz sprouting from the gedilim, is the
creativity expressed in those channeled directions. That is what dominates
human experience. I mangled it; see RSRH's Collected Writings vol III.

>>
I think mangled is much too strong a term, but RSRH's idea is worth giving
another formulation. Dayan Dr. I Grunfeld, in his masterful annotated
translation of Horev, chapter 39, wrote as follows.
"In his fundamental essay "Symbolism in Jewish Law"... RSR Hirsch gives the
following symbolic explanation: The tzizith consist of two parts: g'dil and
anaf, the part which is bound and the part which is hanging down freely.
Thus the moral teaching is expressed that man can only be really free when
he controls and 'binds' himself, i.e.when he subjects himself to the moral
law. The part of the tzitzith which is bound makes up one third of the
length of the tzitzith, whereas the threads which hang down freely make up
two thirds of the length of the tzitzith.This expresses the idea that
Jewish law provides for more freedom than restriction."
RSRH's incredibly insightful essay "Symbolism in Jewish Law" is available in Hebrew translation "HaMitzvot Kismalim", Mossad HaRav Kook.
By including in the same posting a discussion both of Bach vs Beethoven and of  RSRH, RMB has skillfully woven two areivim threads together.
Saul Mashbaum
.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080702/9afac9ee/attachment-0001.htm>

 
 

RHM: >>The second paragraph is your assertion and I don't accept  it. The Big 
Bang is not discussed in terms of First cause. A scientist can  neither say 
it was spontaneous or that it wasn't. An individual teaching the Big  Bang 
brings with him a personal perspective. So an atheist will say that it must  have 
been spontaneous. A believer will say that there was a First cause. Neither  
belief is science but belief <<
 
TK:  On what basis you "reject my second paragraph" I cannot begin to  
imagine, since you have here exactly REPEATED EXACTLY WHAT I SAID, in your own  
words!

 
RHM:  >>If there is an atheistic bias on the part of science  teachers in the 
classroom it should be rooted out.<<

 
TK:  "If"?  No serious person can possibly doubt that there is  an atheistic 
bias on the part of high school and college science teachers and  textbooks.  
As to rooting it out, who would you propose to do the rooting  out, and how?  
"Call Roto-Rooter!"




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

President  Reagan talked with the Soviets while pushing ahead with the 
deployment of Cruise  and Pershing missiles in Europe. He spoke softly ? after 
getting himself a  bigger stick.  --Mark Steyn




**************Gas prices getting you down? Search AOL Autos for 
fuel-efficient used cars.      (http://autos.aol.com/used?ncid=aolaut00050000000007)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080702/3e41d91a/attachment-0001.htm>

Given that the Torah was given for all times and all places, you must
consider that where the Torah seems to contradict current mores,  
Torah trumps
current mores and we are supposed to view current mores through Torah  
eyes  rather
than view the Torah through the eyes of current secular mores.  A   
classic
example would be the Torah's attitude towards homosexual activity,  
which  it
unequivocally calls "to'evah."

(But I do agree that the idea of a 12-year-old girl marrying a man   
of 40 or
50 is quite distasteful, and I wonder if there are any other   
opinions that
would enable a widowed KG to get around that.)



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

I'm not sure I understand what's the bottom line.  Is it that you are  
wrong in finding a 12-year-old girl marrying a man  of 40 or
50 is quite distasteful and you should work on changing your tastes  
so you will find it perfectly ok?  Or is it ok to think something the  
Torah permits, indeed even demands, is distasteful?

Joseph Kaplan

 
 

>>I know of very little (though not nothing) indicating
that  girls ever "ought to" have got married that young; I think it
was always  regarded as simply what people did, rather than as some
moral  imperative.  I think we today should regard it much as we do
cousin  marriages: morally neutral, used to be common, is no  longer
common....<<
 

-- 
Zev  Sero                



>>>>>
It was not that long ago that such young marriages  were still taking place 
among frum Jews.  See  *The Rebbe's Daughter:  Memoir of a Hasidic Childhood* 
by Malkah Shapiro (a book I found absolutely  fascinating).  She lived from 
1894 to 1971, born in Poland, died in  E'Y.  She was the daughter of the Rebbe of 
Kozienice (that's how the book  spells it -- sort of looks like "cozy and 
nice" doesn't it?).  And she was  married at age 12.  However, the chassan was a 
youngster not much older  than herself -- not a man old enough to be her 
grandfather.

 

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

President  Reagan talked with the Soviets while pushing ahead with the 
deployment of Cruise  and Pershing missiles in Europe. He spoke softly ? after 
getting himself a  bigger stick.  --Mark Steyn




**************Gas prices getting you down? Search AOL Autos for 
fuel-efficient used cars.      (http://autos.aol.com/used?ncid=aolaut00050000000007)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20080702/112a61c8/attachment.htm>

 
 
In a message dated 7/2/2008, jkaplan@tenzerlunin.com writes:

>>I'm not sure I understand what's the bottom line.  Is it  that you are  
wrong in finding a 12-year-old girl marrying a  man  of 40 or
50 is quite distasteful and you should work on changing  your tastes  
so you will find it perfectly ok?  Or is it ok to  think something the  
Torah permits, indeed even demands, is  distasteful?<<

Joseph Kaplan




>>>>>
That is quite a fair question.  In the case of  the Torah forbidding what 
current society permits, one must certainly not accept  as "normal" or "neutral" 
what the Torah forbids.  In the case of the Torah  permitting, or even 
requiring, what one finds personally distasteful -- I don't  know if you have an 
obligation to adjust your personal preferences.  If,  for example, you are a 
vegetarian and find the very thought of meat repulsive --  are you obligated to 
work on yourself and change your personal tastes, knowing  that when the Bais 
Hamikdash is rebuilt, you will have to eat the Korban  Pesach?  I don't think so 
-- I think you are still allowed to say, "I don't  like meat" -- but must 
admit I have no sources.  (You'll still have to eat  the Korban Pesach, but you 
won't have to enjoy it.)
 
In the case of marriage, the halacha is clear that a woman is never married  
against her will, so any 12-year-old girl who does not want to marry the Kohen 
 Gadol -- does not have to.  She is under no compulsion to change her  
feelings. 
 
What about the rest of us?  Are we obligated to adjust our mental  furniture 
so that marriage between a child and a middle-aged man no longer seems  
distasteful?  I don't know.  It really is a good question.  I  must admit that I 
have never found the picture of three-year-old Rivkah marrying  40-year-old 
Yitzchak to be exactly romantically satisfying, either.  Even  allowing for the 
fact that the marriage was not consummated until she matured,  it's not so 
appealing.  When I found out that the Rashbam says Rivkah was  14, not 3, when she 
got married -- I did feel better.
 
One thing you do see with this big difference in ages -- by the time  they've 
been married 20 years or more, the disparity in their ages no longer  seems 
so glaring.  When Avimelech sees them from his window, they are  interacting 
like any married couple.  They also talk to each other (about  Esav's wives, 
whom they both detest) like any married couple.  


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

President Reagan talked with the Soviets while pushing ahead  with the 
deployment of Cruise and Pershing missiles in Europe. He spoke softly ?  after 
getting himself a bigger stick.  --Mark Steyn




**************Gas prices getting you down? Search AOL Autos for 
fuel-efficient used cars.      (http://autos.aol.com/used?ncid=aolaut00050000000007)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20080702/39d06ae0/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 236
***************************************

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..."