Avodah Mailing List

Volume 27: Number 139

Mon, 12 Jul 2010

• 1. Re: anti-meat rhetoric "according to Judaism" (I. Balbin)
• 2. Re: Gra on men taking care of babies (T6...@aol.com)
• 3. Re: Tzedaka & middot Q (T6...@aol.com)
• 4. Re: Klalei horaah (Ben Waxman)
• 5. Re: Tzedaka & middot Q (Micha Berger)
• 6. Re: Tzedaka & middot Q (Gershon Dubin)
• 7. Re: Klalei horaah (Rich, Joel)
• 8. Re: Be Careful of Looking Frum (Harry Maryles)
• 9. Re: anti-meat rhetoric "according to Judaism" (kennethgmiller@juno.com)
• 10. Re: anti-meat rhetoric "according to Judaism" (Jacob Farkas)
• 11. Re: Korach Question (Zvi Lampel)
• 12. Re: Korach Question (Zvi Lampel)
• 13. Mining on Shabbos (kennethgmil...@juno.com)
• 14. Re: Mining on Shabbos (Micha Berger)
• 15. Re: Mining on Shabbos (Liron Kopinsky)

> 
> Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2010 17:06:23 -0400
> From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
> 
> : 2) While Judaism forbids tsa'ar ba'alei chayim, inflicting unnecessary pain
> : on animals...
> 
> 
> TBC is allowed as long as what the
> person wants (other than enjoying cruelty itself, eg bullfighting) is
> not within reach in another way. Similarly 

Sure, but is there a need/chiyuv for a Kehila to actively seek meat that is
known to be produced in farms that are more "animal friendly"? If there are
Goyim who seek such standards, and I don't speak about adopting
vegetarianism, is there also a chiyuv or at least a chumra to seek out, or
seek to establish kosher animal friendly sources?

Is it not a chicken and egg problem (sic) whereby it is more expensive
because of a lack of consumer demand, however, with consumer demand it
becomes more affordable?

We have Glatt, but is there also an inyan to have food that is "Noki Michshah Tzaar B'alei Chayim"?
We know Reb Moshe's psak on veal. 

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

>>  In the thread titled "biography of R. Elyashiv", R' Zev Sero quoted a 
post which  R' Ben Waxman posted on Areivim:

> The Gra writes in his perush on  Pirke Avot that if someone hears
> his baby cry at night, he should ignore  him and let his wife take
> care of the baby. Either the man is learning  or sleeping in order
> to learn. Either way, the baby's problems are not  his concern.

I am SHOCKED by this. If the Gra (or anyone else) would say  such a thing, 
surely they would point out that it only refers to people who  never 
interrupt their learning for any other mitzva.

And even if so, to  say that "the baby's problems are not his concern" 
seems absurd. Maybe his  learning takes priority over his child's pain, but to 
say that he should not be  concerned seems cruel. <<



Akiva Miller

 
 
 
>>>>
It is only "cruel" if you think that the baby's cries may go  unheeded.  If 
you assume, OTOH, that it is only a question of WHO should  take care of 
the baby -- the father or the mother -- then I don't find it  shocking at all 
to answer, "The mother should get up and take care of the baby,  and make 
sure that her husband is able to learn undisturbed or able to sleep  
undisturbed so that he can learn well tomorrow."
 
I am certain that the Gra would also say that if the mother is  unavailable 
-- she is ill, for example, or she is in the hospital after the  birth of 
the next baby -- that the father should take care of the baby, as it  then 
quickly becomes a case of pikuach nefesh to leave a baby unfed and  wallowing 
in its own waste.
 
I do agree with RAM that the GRA's statement ("The baby is not your  
concern") applies (or should apply) only to the rare man who is on such a  high 
level that he never, ever interrupts his Torah learning for anything  else -- 
never picks up a newspaper, never goes on the internet, never  even goes to 
Avodah.  Anyone who can take time off his Torah learning  to read Avodah 
should also take time off his learning to take care of his baby  once in a 
while. (That means /you/ whoever you are -- reading this right  now. :- )  ) 
This is a chessed to his child and also to his  wife.
 
Please note that I do consider it the primary obligation of the mother to  
care for the baby, which is why I say it is a chessed to her (rather  than 
an obligation) if the father pitches in and shares the load.
 
Going off on what may be somewhat of a tangent, I also think that if the  
mother is not a stay-at-home mom and has no possibility of catching up on her 
 missed sleep later -- ESPECIALLY if she is working in order to enable her  
husband to stay in kollel -- that the father then has an OBLIGATION to 
share the  load and sometimes care for the crying baby in the middle of the 
night.  In  such a case, both the father's sleep and the mother's sleep are 
equally  important, in order to enable him to continue learning Torah.  (But I 
must  add that I'm very conflicted about "Kollel feminism" because mothers  
working and dumping their babies in daycare is far from ideal --  there is no 
substitute for a mother.)
 

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

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





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100711/55fe3701/attachment-0001.htm>

 

From: Micha Berger _micha@aishdas.org_ (mailto:mi...@aishdas.org) 

>> But the  entire concept of tzedaqah literally meaning "[social] justice"
and being a  redistribution of wealth opens the question of exactly how
socialist halakhah  expects us to be.

Thoughts?  <<

:-)BBii!
-Micha

 
>>>>>>
Tzedakah is the /opposite/ of socialism.  Tzedakah means it is your  money 
and you voluntarily give it to beneficiaries whom you consider  worthy.   In 
the case of terumos uma'asros, you have the halachic  right to decide which 
kohen and levi you will give to and the kohen can't come  to your house and 
take his donations by force -- even though you do have a  general 
obligation to give and he does have a general right to receive.   The kohen therefore 
has an incentive to make himself agreeable and useful to his  fellow 
citizens -- rather than coming at them with "attitude" and "es kumt  mir."
 
Socialism is the opposite -- it's not  your money, the government  takes it 
away from you and decides who to give your money to, whether you think  
those recipients deserve it or not.  Socialism is attractive to many people  
for the very reason that it /frees/ them from the obligation to give tzedakah 
--  cleanses their conscience -- so they can look at a poor person and say, 
"You're  not my problem, go to the welfare office and leave me alone."  This 
is, for  the same reason, the big attraction of voting Democat -- it 
enables you to feel  charitable because you voted to redistribute /other people's/ 
money, and frees  you of the obligation to give away your own money.   Once 
again,  socialism is the opposite of tzedakah.
 
--Toby Katz
==========

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



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100711/5a9c8215/attachment-0001.htm>

How is then that Rav did not recognize that Shmuel was greater in certain areas and the opposite?

Ben
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Joshua Meisner 



  I was shown that the Rosh (BK 4:4) says the opposite of what I suggested,
  namely, that the Chachmei HaGemara paskened like Shmuel b'dinei and like
  Rav b'issurei because they recognized that these areas were each their
  fields of expertise, in that they spent more time involved with them and
  hence were more able to be m'dakdek and yored l'omek hasugya.  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100711/ceefbc42/attachment-0001.htm>

On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 12:34:34AM -0400, T6...@aol.com wrote:
: Tzedakah is the /opposite/ of socialism.  Tzedakah means it is your  money 
: and you voluntarily give it to beneficiaries whom you consider  worthy...

Then why isn't it called "chesed mamonos" os the like? The word translates
to justice, not generosity, compassion, or anything else that extends
beyond the limits of duty?

: Socialism is the opposite -- it's not your money, the government takes it 
: away from you and decides who to give your money to, whether you think  
: those recipients deserve it or not...

But what about the notion, as I quoted from RSShkop, that even once
"earned", your success is from heaven and thus the money is not yours,
it's G-d's. RSS uses this idea to say that therefore HQBH wants you to
distribute that money according to need. He doesn't mention merit.

It is also tzedaqah to give someone who was once wealthier than you dai
machsero -- including helping him obtain things you personally wouldn't
budget for yourself!

If you focus entirely on who makes the disbursment decision, rather than
worth/deservingness vs need, perhaps I could see your point. But then,
that's not focusing on Socialism, it's focusing on the Totalitarian
Fascism that allegedly socialist countries had to turn themselves into
in order to bully the money out of people.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Good decisions come from experience;
mi...@aishdas.org        Experience comes from bad decisions.
http://www.aishdas.org          - Djoha, from a Sepharadi fable
Fax: (270) 514-1507

Let's not forget also that beis din has the right to forcibly extract
tzedaka.

Gershon
gershon.du...@juno.com
 
____________________________________________________________
TODAY: iPads for $23.74?
SPECIAL REPORT: iPads are being auctioned for an incredible 80% off!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4c39b6785bd9831e4bm06vuc

Another interesting question to me based on this Rosh is where did he get
this distinction from (e.g. is there anything in the Talmud that hints at
differences such as these given that they lived in different cities - were
there any indications of specialization).  Did he have a mesora or was he
just wrestling with why the split decision in this case of authorities?)
KT
Joel Rich

________________________________


How is then that Rav did not recognize that Shmuel was greater in certain areas and the opposite?

Ben
----- Original Message -----
From: Joshua Meisner<mailto:jmeis...@gmail.com>



I was shown that the Rosh (BK 4:4) says the opposite of what I suggested,
namely, that the Chachmei HaGemara paskened like Shmuel b'dinei and like
Rav b'issurei because they recognized that these areas were each their
fields of expertise, in that they spent more time involved with them and
hence were more able to be m'dakdek and yored l'omek hasugya.
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/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100711/dcf97321/attachment-0001.htm>

--- On Sat, 7/10/10, Meir Rabi <meir...@gmail.com> wrote:




And here is another reason not to pursue or be perceived as pursuing
Chumros, especially when in a public arena or when eating amongst others;
One can be Mattir Neder based on the fear that being perceived as a Frumer
actually exposes one to a greater and more intense Divine Inspection of
ones "books". Nedarim 22a


Whats really interesting about this is that it has nothing to do with
whether one is actually Frum or not - it is about the way this person is
PERCEIVED by others. The Ran explains NirAh ShaHu MachZik AtzMo KeChassid.


Dare I suggest that this may be a contributing factor to our long extended Galus?
-------------------------------------------------------
?
I believe that this is what R' Wolbe calls Frumkeit - which he is
absolutely opposed to. When one pursues Chumros in order to look Frum, they
are doing it for the wrong reasons and it becomes counterproductive.

HM

Want Emes and Emunah in your life? 

Try this: http://haemtza.blogspot.com/




      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100711/213c4b65/attachment-0001.htm>

R"n Shoshana L. Boublil wrote:
> During a discussion on another group, someone posted the following
> list of reasons for vegetarianism "acc. To Judaism".  I was
> wondering if anyone knows of a source, article that refutes this
> list, item-by-item ...

I don't know if the list *can* be refuted. From my quick perusal of it, each comment seems rather reasonable.

The problem, as I see it, is that none of those six items demands we become
vegetarian and totally avoid meat. At most, they are telling us to be more
careful about which meat we eat, and how much.

For example, if they claim that the animals to be shechted are treated
improperly, then we do not need to avoid all meat, only to seek out sources
which treat their animals properly. And if they claim that meat is
unhealthy, then one only needs to limit one's intake, not to abstain
entirely. And so on for the rest of the list.

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
LCD 42" TV for $26.42? Macbook Pro for $91.73?
Are these prices real? You WON'T Believe What We Found!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4c3a00e52622f1e63c2st06vuc

> On Fri, Jul 09, 2010 at 07:26:03PM +0300, Shoshana L. Boublil quoted from
> some Jewish Vegetarian argument:
> : 1) While Judaism mandates that people should be very careful about
> : preserving their health and their lives...
> : 2) While Judaism forbids tsa'ar ba'alei chayim, inflicting unnecessary pain
> : on animals...
> : 4) While Judaism mandates bal tashchit...
>
R' Micha Berger said:
> The definition of risk to health, "unnecessary pain", and hashchasah are not
> what the author presumes. Minor risk is permitted -- otherwise it would
> be assur to cross streets or drive. TBC is allowed as long as what the
> person wants (other than enjoying cruelty itself, eg bullfighting) is
> not within reach in another way. Similarly bal tashchis.
>
> The values needed to justify vegetarianism are inserted into the "while"s,
> not inherent in the dinim being cited.

I will agree that argument #1 (and to some degree #3,#4,#5, and #6)
cited is hyperbole, argument #2 is mostly accurate. The key issue is
factory farming though, and not necessarily the eating of meat. The
overwhelming majority of meat in this country is available through
this channel, and Kosher meat is no different.

I understand these arguments to suggest that we assess the reality
that goes into meat production, and consider the implications that the
act of eating meat has on the welfare of the animals and planet.
Granted, if the meat is pasture raised (as was the norm until the past
century), these arguments no longer remain.

Argument #2) Tza'ar Ba'alei Hayyim -- Cows raised in a feedlot have a
corn(or other grain)-based diet rather than a grass based diet. This
modification to the animal's diet is offset by antibiotics and other
procedures. The living quarters are cramped and the animals are knee
deep in their own Tzo'ah. Chickens live in cramped quarters.

I will be fair, though. I don't absolutely know know whether the cow
or chicken truly minds, is suffering, has the capacity to file a
complaint. For all I know, Kelapei Shemaya Galya, the cow is totally
oblivious to this treatment. But how would this be any different to
seeing a donkey Roveitz Tachas Masao? If it appears inhumane to us, we
are obligated to intervene on the animals behalf, even if we have no
means to ascertain that it actually "hurts" the animal.

Pasture fed animals have none of these issues. Their diet does not
require modifications to keep them from getting sick. They are not
confined to cramped indoor spaces. These are not unlike the animals
that were slaughtered for the past few thousand years. Chazal, and
leaders since, mentioned no explicit objection to eating meat, as
their animals were not subject to these conditions. For the most part,
our current Gedolim have not raised much objection either, a notable
exception being R' Moshe Feinstein regarding veal. I can only
speculate what his reaction would have been had he visited a feedlot
as well as a farm that raises pasture fed beef.

The argument ( #3) surrounding environmentalism, (#4) bal tashchis,
(#5) keeping bread from the poor, are all products from the same
questionable practice of Factory Farming. Absent of this process,
there would be less environmental impact (no need to grow the corn for
cattle, transport said corn, etc.). In a pasture model, there are
fewer animals per acre, and their cumulative waste has much less
negative impact as a result. Resources that go toward growing more
corn (peirush: governmental subsidies) and grain so as to feed the
cattle can be diverted to producing food lower on the food chain and
can arguably feed a greater number of people.

Again to be fair, I am not thoroughly convinced that poverty will be
abolished or otherwise severely diminished as a result of the
cessation of factory farming. And I doubt even further, that if all
the Kosher meat production shifts to pasture raised cattle, that these
changes will occur. In any event, the global shift towards factory
farming does have global consequences environmentally, as well as in
resource management and food distribution. This is worthy of
consideration, while not explicitly in violation of Bal Tashchis.

--Jacob Farkas

R' Micha Berger Thu,8 Jul 2010  wrote:
> Ah, but doesn't RZL write:
>>  The Rambam all along was talking about the trust in the authenticity of   
>>  Moshe's prophecies that is /forever enduring/, not a belief that lasts   
>>  for only a short while...

> If this was the emunah caused at Qerias Yam Suf, then how does it differ
> from that gained *and demonstrated* during the actual night of yetzi'as
> Mitzrayim?

The Rambam (Moreh 1:63) holds that over the galus of Mitzrayim, most
of the bnei Yisroel lost allegiance to the belief in One Creator, and
adapted the philosophy of the gentiles that the universe always existed,
and was ruled by unsupervised natural forces. At the Burning Bush,
Hashem provided Moshe Rabbeynu with the arguments proving the existence
of Hashem, and miraculous signs to prove that He spoke to Moshe and --
for the first time -- communicated commandments to man through man.
(The prophetic commandments given to the Ahvos were commandments to them
alone. They taught others, however, not on the authority of conveying
Hashem's commandments, but through logical persuasion.) These arguments
and signs, however, the Rambam holds, Hashem told Moshe to present only
to the Zekeinim, the intellectual elite of the people.

The night of yetzi'as Mitzrayim, culminating the Ten Plagues, the entire
nation displayed its rejection of the Egyptian gods and acceptance of
Hashem as the Ruler of the Universe, by publicly killing and eating the
Egyptian lambs (Moreh 1:66).

At the splitting of the Yam Suf, the Midrash teaches that entire nation
witnessed the vision of Ezekiel and the prophetic perception of Hashem.

But it was only at Mattan Torah that the entire nation itself
prophetically experienced Hashem giving commandments, and prophetically
heard Hashem Himself declare that Moshe Rabbeynu was to be thereon
believed forever as accurately reporting the word of Hashem.

Zvi Lampel

Re: [Avodah] Korach Question

On 7/11/2010 10:18 PM, Zvi Lampel wrote:
> The night of yetzi'as Mitzrayim...the entire nation displayed its 
> rejection of the Egyptian gods. and acceptance of Hashem...by publicly 
> killing and eating the Egyptian lambs (Moreh 1:66).
Make that (Moreh 3:46).

Zvi Lampel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100712/77fa98b7/attachment-0001.htm>

A friend asked an interesting question: Why isn't mining among the Avos Melachos?

If the melachos are derived or defined as those actions which were
necessary for building the Mishkan, and the Mishkan used a lot of gold,
silver, and brass, then wouldn't the acquiring of such metals be an Av
Melacha?

The first idea that comes to mind is that this might be included in the
first melacha, choresh, plowing. But in fact, this is the classic example
of a Melacha She'ein Tzricha L'gufa: Digging is assur d'Oraisa only if my
purpose is for the hole, *not* if my goal is for the dirt which I'm
obtaining. Perhaps someone makes a distinction between dirt and metal, but
in this context, I just don't see it.

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
Go Green! # 1 Energy Pick
Think Big Oil has a future? AEGY - Think Green, Renewable Energy!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4c3b0da1bf7551fd5e0st06vuc

On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 12:40:26PM +0000, kennethgmil...@juno.com wrote:
: If the melachos are derived or defined as those actions which were
: necessary for building the Mishkan, and the Mishkan used a lot of gold,
: silver, and brass, then wouldn't the acquiring of such metals be an
: Av Melacha?

Lemaaseh, weren't they acquired from the Mitzriyum before leaving, rather
than from gold, silver and copper and tin or zinc mines in the midbar?

(Copper + tin = bronze, whereas
copper + zinc = brass,
but I don't know which is nechoshes, or even if nechoshes means copper
itself.)

-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Zion will be redeemed through justice,
mi...@aishdas.org        and her returnees, through righteousness.
http://www.aishdas.org
Fax: (270) 514-1507

On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 5:40 AM, kennethgmil...@juno.com <
kennethgmil...@juno.com> wrote:

> A friend asked an interesting question: Why isn't mining among the Avos
> Melachos?
>
> If the melachos are derived or defined as those actions which were
> necessary for building the Mishkan, and the Mishkan used a lot of gold,
> silver, and brass, then wouldn't the acquiring of such metals be an Av
> Melacha?
>

Was there actually gold to be mined in the Sinai desert? Or was all of the
gold previously mined by the Egyptians?

Smelting should be forbidden, but it is already through other melachot.

~Liron
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20100712/37d21677/attachment.htm>

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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 27, Issue 139
***************************************

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..."