Avodah Mailing List

Volume 25: Number 404

Thu, 04 Dec 2008

• 1. Re: Dying al Kiddush Hashem (Yitzhak Grossman)
• 2. Re: Kiddush Ha'Shem (Michael Poppers)
• 3. Re: R' Aviner on gadol hador status (Samuel Svarc)
• 4. Re: R' Aviner on gadol hador status (T6...@aol.com)
• 5. Thursday Evening begin Prayer for Rain (Ari Meir Brodsky)
• 6. Re: Harag, ratzach, heimis (Rich, Joel)
• 7. Re Godol Hador (david guttmann)
• 8. effects of religous worship on health (Steven J Scher)
• 9. articles on effectiveness of intercessory prayer on health (Stadlan, Noam)
• 10. Re: R' Aviner on gadol hador status (Rich, Joel)
• 11. nefilat apayim (Simon Krysl)
• 12. Re: nefilat apayim (Micha Berger)

On Tue, 2 Dec 2008 10:19:58 -0500
"Rich, Joel" <JR...@sibson.com> wrote:

...

> Any nafka mina l'dina?

Actually, there is, and quite a fascinating one.  Apparently, in the
late '40s, the question arose [0] if it was appropriate for widows
whose husbands had been killed / murdered / executed in the Holocaust
to remarry, since several Rishonim [1] maintain that widows whose
husbands have been killed Al Yihud Ha'Shem should never remarry,
"mi'shum kevod shamayim u'meshum kevodo".

Rav Yehoshua Ehrenberg [2] vigorously rejects this idea at great length,
and a major part of his refutation consists of my basic point, that
victims aren't necessarily kedoshim:

"But that which people say that even if he has not given up his life Al
Kidush Ha'Shem but he has been murdered by Akum because he is a Jew, he
is also called 'kadosh', this is apparently 'kidushei taus' ... but
certainly those who have been involuntarily killed, not through their
good will to give up their lives for God and His Torah, even though the
killing is because of hatred of Israel it is obvious to the Gemara that
they have not reached the level that no creation can stand in their
'mehizah' ... but ordinary people ('beinonim') who were simply killed
out of hatred of Israel and they did not say that if they violate the
religion they will be saved. even though they receive atonement for
their sins and they have risen to the level of servants of God, to the
level of sanctifiers of God like the martyrs of Lod they have not
reached."

[0] In the journals Ha'Posek and Ha'Pardes.  I haven't yet gotten a
hold of them; I am citing R. Ehrenberg, as below.
[1] See Ozar Ha'Poskim EH end of Siman 1.
[2] Resp. Devar Yehoshua V:Inyanim Shonim:37, and see also I:32:15 and
his letter published in Ozar Ha'Poskim at the end of Vol. 1

> Joel Rich

Yitzhak
--
Bein Din Ledin - http://bdl.freehostia.com
A discussion of Hoshen Mishpat, Even Ha'Ezer and other matters

In Avodah Digest V25#401, RYG wrote:
> Someone asked me off-list if I'd say that most victims of the Holocaust
did not die Al Kiddush Ha'Shem. <
Hineni.  I kept the conversation private because I didn't know (es chatoay
ani mazkir: my Areivim-digest reading is haphazard at best) if someone else
had already asked the Q.

As RYG knows, he and I have been considering his namesake Yitzchaq Avinu's
status, w/in the context of the nisayon known as the Aqeidah, as a paradigm
for both his opinion (YA was a qadosh because he voluntarily agreed to give
up his life to fulfill the Divine directive) and the other tzad (YA was
n'qadeish when, with no will or intent of his own, he was designated by
Avraham as a qorban, and he didn't lose that status [and wouldn't have lost
it even if he had not voluntarily agreed to be a qorban]). (For those who
care, emotionally I'm with the other tzad, but I understand his argument.)

Those on this list who disagree with RYG (or, at least, are arguing with
his position) seem to be repeatedly quoting those who speak of Jews
becoming q'doshim.  Is it silly for me to ask if there's a difference
between (a) someone being a qadosh for dying because he's a Jew and (b)
someone dying al qiddush haSheim?

In #402, R'Micha a post ended by writing:
> And so, I would argue (and have before, but at less length) that the
majority of the people we describe most Shabbasos as "qehillos haqodesh
shemaseru nafsham al qiddushas hasheim" didn't actually choose Yahadus
over death. <
The subject of "mas'ru" is the q'hillos, not the individuals, and no, I'm
not playing a semantics game.  Yes, Av haRachamim is primarily about
individuals ("hachasidim v'haysharim v'hat'mimim..."), but I don't think
one can gloss over the appellation of "al q'dushas haSheim" being applied
to the q'hillah, which did choose to be wiped out as an assembly of Jews
rather than convert.  That said, RSRH did emphasize the sacrifice of the
individuals in his essay (Collected Writings I, Iyar III [pp. 141-151]) on
"minsharim qallu...la'asos R'tzon Qonam v'cheifetz Tzuram"...but he also
spoke only of "those who were prepared at every moment to cast away freedom
and life rather than to surrender the Torah, who were happy to die for
Torah if they were not fortunate enough to live for Torah" and didn't at
all consider what R'Micha assumes of the "[silent] majority."

All the best from
--Michael Poppers via RIM pager
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20081203/c6bfe504/attachment-0001.htm>

R' MYG:
> > R' David Riceman:
> > It's true that the language is ambiguous,
> > but I don't think that either the Rama or
> > the Trumath HaDeshen needs to be understood as saying that
> > "gadol hador" is a position which can be occupied by only one
> > person at a time.
> 
> Gemara Mefureshes: Sukkah 47a.

I looked at the Gemara and don't see what the rayah is. The colloquial usage
today is to talk about a Gadol, the Gadol HaDor, and the Gedolim. The first
and last expression being used for multiple persons and the middle
expression being reserved for the speaker's preferred pick. The Gemara is
saying "and all the Gedolim, in one sukkah". No rayah to the discussion.

I do think from the before-referenced halacha in SA that one tears kriah
upon the death of the Gadol HaDor, that the logical implication is that it
refers to one specific person (especially if one looks at the reasons given
for the halacha). This halacha, presumably, is on the one person in the
geographical area of knowledge who is THE Gadol sh'b'kulom.

KT,
MSS

 
 
> Looking back now, for example, I think everybody would agree that  the 
> ... Vilna Gaon was "the" godol hador of his  dor...[--TK]

Maybe. Maybe not. I think that even today, some might give  that title to
the Baal Shem Tov. [--R' Joel Rich]


 


>>>>>
They were not exactly the same dor.  The Ba'al Shem Tov died in 1760,  the 
Vilna Gaon in 1797.  A person doesn't become a godol hador until he is  at least 
in his fifties and more often not until he's 70, so the Vilna Gaon (who  was 
40 when the Baal Shem Tov died) would not yet have been the godol hador when  
the Besht was still alive.  Thus, each could well have been "the" godol  hador 
of his dor.





--Toby Katz
=============
"If you don't read the  newspaper you are uninformed; 
if you do read the newspaper you are  misinformed."
--Mark Twain
Read *Jewish World Review* at _http://jewishworldreview.com/_ 
(http://jewishworldreview.com/) 
**************Make your life easier with all your friends, email, and 
favorite sites in one place.  Try it now. 
(http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&;icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000010)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20081204/fdfc69a9/attachment-0001.htm>

Dear Friends,

        This is a friendly reminder to Jews outside of Israel that our daily
prayers should include the request for rain, beginning with Maariv this
Thursday evening, December 4, 2008, corresponding to the evening of 8
Kislev, 5769.  The phrase "Veten tal umatar livracha" - "Give us dew and
rain for a blessing" is inserted into the 9th blessing of the weekday
shemone esrei, from now until Pesach.  I encourage everyone to remind
friends and family members of this event, especially those who may not have
occasion to be in shul at that time.  I've already seen one calendar with
the wrong date listed this year, so please don't forget to start on Thursday
evening.

        We begin requesting rain in the Diaspora on the 60th day of the fall
season, as approximated by Shmuel in the Talmud (Taanit 10a, Eiruvin 56a).
For more information about this calculation, follow the link below, to a
fascinating article giving a (very brief) introduction to the Jewish
calendar, followed by a detailed discussion on why we begin praying for rain
when we do:  www.lookstein.org/articles/veten_tal.htm

Wishing everyone a happy Chanukka,
-Ari Brodsky.

-----------------------
Ari M. Brodsky
ari.brod...@utoronto.ca

 


> IOW, the go'el has a license, not a chiyuv. Is he better off using the

> license (uvi'arta hara'ah miqirbekha) or is he better off not taking 
> revenge?

Actually, there's a mahlokes between R. Yosi Hagelili and R. Akiva
(Makos 12a) whether the Goel Ha'Dam has a Reshus or a Mizvah, although
Rambam does rule that it's merely a Reshus (Rozeah 5:10).

> Micha Berger             A person must be very patient

Yitzhak
--
Lfi shitat harambam does HKB"H have a preference?(e.g.is it like tzitzit
or yfat toar?)
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.

Shut Rivash Teshuvah 271 has an interesting discussion on a related issue.
The outcome is that nowadays  authority is localized by virtue of the Rav
who is also a teacher and Rosh Yeshiva, is usually the Rebbi of  the
Rabbanim in his jurisdiction. IOW a Rav and Rosh Yeshiva in an  area
(country? Which is not clearly defined other than I guess where his Talmidim
are active) has rights to impose his psak by virtue of him being the Rebbi
of most Rabbanim.  The authority of the Rav on the jurisdiction is based on
his being the Rosh Yeshiva and therefore the Rebbi of the majority of the
Rabbanim in the area, they are bound to not pasken where their Rebbi is
without permission (Moreh Halacha Bifnei Rabo) . Semicha (Bizman Hazeh) is
therefore permission to do so given by the Rebbi. Outsiders who come into
the jurisdiction and are Talmidim of another Rav have no obligation to
submit to the local Rav and are considered as his Chaverim. Furthermore the
Talmid has to be a Talmid muvhak of the RY to be restricted by his
authority. 

Clearly Rivash did not accept the existence of the position of Gadol Hador,
in fact destroys the concept totally, though from the machlokes description
that idea had germinated already in his time. Teshuvah worthwhile learning
from an historic perspective too. 
David Guttmann
 
If you agree that Believing is Knowing, join me in the search for Knowledge
at http://yediah.blogspot.com/ 
 
Ve'izen vechiker (Kohelet 12:9) subscribe to Hakirah at www.hakirah.org 

> On Wed, 03 Dec 2008 11:41:33 -0700 Steven J Scher <sjsc...@eiu.edu>
> wrote:

>> R'Yitzchak Grossman:
>>> We are not saying that He would do so "simply to convince people
> of His
>>> existence"; on the contrary, I am saying that as long as He can
> be
>>> expected to act according to the normal ways in which we are
> told He
>>> acts, i.e. as a Shomai'a Tefillah, we ought to be able to
> measure and
>>> quantify this effect. ...
>>

ME (Steve Scher):

>> Yes, He's a Shmoai'a Tefillah, but He is also an Ohavei Mishpat
> v'Tzedek.
>> HaShem hears all prayers, but doesn't necessarily act on all of
> them ...
>> So, what would be His reasoning for
>> treating those patients who are not deserving, but just happened
> to be
>> prayed for as part of our study, better than those who are more
> deserving,
>> but were randomly assigned into the non-prayer group?
>

R' Daniel Israel

> Another possibility is that He would arrange so that the supposedly
> random groups are not random.  The scientists can pick any random
> number generator they like, HKB"H can always "game" the system so
> that the prayed-for group contains the people he wishes to give a
> better outcome to.


Yes.  I think this is the right answer... although I hadn't thought of it 
until recently (as part of thinking about this discussion on A/A).  What's 
random from our perspective is never random from HaShem's perspective, no?

But... For HaShem to do this, He would have to want to provide the 
evidence of his existence ... this wouldn't be the way that He carries out 
his normal activity (i.e., as a Shomea Tefila as discussed by RYG above). 
So, there's the question: Not only should we be seeking evidence of His 
existence, but does HE want to provide the evidence.  Do we require 
evidence to have emunah?

Perhaps we should: 'vayaminu baShem u'vmoshe avdo' comes AFTER 'v'yar 
yisroel es haYad haGedola asher Asa HaShem'...

on the other hand, did Avraham Avinu wait for evidence before he rejected 
his father's idols?


In any event, this is a separate question from whether we should TRY to 
get the evidence.  If we do a study like the one we're talking about, we 
are essentially testing HaShem.  Is that a good idea?  Especially since 
its 'failure' could be used by atheists, etc, as evidence of THEIR case, 
despite the fact that, as R'DI points out:

>
> OTOH, it is important to note that while a strong positive
> correlation would be plausible piece of evidence for existence
> (although it could also be a statistical anomaly or the result of a
> methodological error, the latter being very common in this type of
> study), a negative result (no difference between the samples) would
> not be evidence for anything, really.  HKB"H could simple choose
> not to reveal Himself in this way.
>
> In fact, when I hear studies of this sort showing positive results,
> I tend to be skeptical, not because I don't believe HKB"H exists,
> chv"sh, but because I don't believe He runs the world in a way such
> that this kind of test can work.

A pretty large number of randomized controlled studies have been published
regarding the effect of intercessory prayer.  Below are links to either
abstracts or articles of a few more recently published studies.


http://jme.bmj.com/cgi/content/abstract/34/9/e18


http://mrw.interscience.wiley.com/cochrane/clsysrev/articles/CD000
368/frame.
html


http://archinte.ama-assn.org/cgi/reprint/159/19/2273


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11761499?ordinalpos=1&;itool=EntrezSystem2
.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DiscoveryPanel.Pubmed_Discovery_R
A&linkpos=2&log$=relatedarticles&logdbfrom=pubmed


http://www.bmj.com/cgi/reprint/323/7327/1450


http://www.liebertonline.com/doi/abs/10.1089%2F1075553041323803

Noam Stadlan

 


I do think from the before-referenced halacha in SA that one tears kriah
upon the death of the Gadol HaDor, that the logical implication is that
it refers to one specific person (especially if one looks at the reasons
given for the halacha). This halacha, presumably, is on the one person
in the geographical area of knowledge who is THE Gadol sh'b'kulom.

KT,
MSS

_______________________________________________
My point was that the title gadol hador (one or many) has a halachik
implication.
BTWiirc if you do a search on gadol hador you get some interesting
examples of who was one.

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.

A possibly silly question: is there a general halachic ruling (a
prohibition?) on doing nefilat apayim in the absence of a minyan?
(Alternatively, is there a disagreement on this?) Or would what we do
(sitting straight even in shul with a Torah present, but without a minyan)
be a local minhag? I am merely wondering about the status, viz., origin of
this practice.
With apologies (also for having sent this subjectless before)
Simon Krysl
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20081204/8f1b46d2/attachment-0001.htm>

On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 12:07:59PM +0100, Simon Krysl wrote:
: A possibly silly question: is there a general halachic ruling (a
: prohibition?) on doing nefilat apayim in the absence of a minyan?
: (Alternatively, is there a disagreement on this?) Or would what we do
: (sitting straight even in shul with a Torah present, but without a minyan)
: be a local minhag? I am merely wondering about the status, viz., origin of
: this practice.

Interestin time to ask. RDSchoemann got me started on KSA Yomi, and this
was in Monday's learning. KSA 22:4. There is a bi-lingual copy at
<http://www.geocities.com/yona_n.geo/kizzur/kizzur22.htm>.

    One does not "fall on one's face;" except in a place where there
    is a Torah scroll. However in a place where there is no Torah scroll,
    even though there are other sacred texts, one does not "fall on
    one's face." [1] Rather, one says the psalm without "falling on
    one's face." When one prays in the courtyard of the synagogue and
    the entrance to the synagogue is open, it is considered as if a Torah
    scroll was there. [2]
    
    1) The Mishna Berurah 131:11 mentions opinions which require "falling
    on one's face" in the presence of sacred texts even though a Torah
    scroll is not present.
    2) So one can "fall on one's face."

The footnotes from "Darkei Halakhah (based on the SA, the Ben Ish Chai
and the Kaf haChaim) footnotes (translation mine):
    3) We say "tachanun" even in a place that has no seifer Torah (BIC
    Ki Sisa 14)

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             A life of reaction is a life of slavery,
mi...@aishdas.org        intellectually and spiritually. One must
http://www.aishdas.org   fight for a life of action, not reaction.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            -Rita Mae Brown


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 25, Issue 404
***************************************

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..."