Avodah Mailing List

Volume 27: Number 221

Tue, 21 Dec 2010

• 1. Re: Just one Hashem in Heaven (Arie Folger)
• 2. Re: bavel leadership (Arie Folger)
• 3. Re: Just one Hashem in Heaven (Micha Berger)
• 4. Re: bavel leadership (Micha Berger)
• 5. aseret be-tevet - friday (Eli Turkel)
• 6. Re: aseret be-tevet - friday (Micha Berger)
• 7. Re: bavel leadership (Zev Sero)
• 8. Re: bavel leadership (Micha Berger)
• 9. Ends and Means Must Be Pure (Prof. Levine)
• 10. Re: Ends and Means Must Be Pure (Micha Berger)
• 11. Re: Just one Hashem in Heaven (David W. Eisen)
• 12. Bizayon HaMeis (Moshe Y. Gluck)
• 13. Re: Bizayon HaMeis (Joseph Kaplan)
• 14. Mayim Achronim (Goldmeier)
• 15. Re: Mayim Achronim (Micha Berger)
• 16. Re: Mayim Achronim (menucha)
• 17. Re: Mayim Achronim (Micha Berger)
• 18. Re: Bizayon HaMeis (Zev Sero)

RMB wrote:
> The dispute about the nature of tzimtzum is a -- and possibly
> THE -- philosophical point of departure between the Gra and
> Chassidus.

THE other THE point is the nature of deveikut. Quite major
disagreement, but nowadays quite unknown.

-- 
Arie Folger,
Recent blog posts on http://ariefolger.wordpress.com/
* Basler Gymnasium experimentiert mit Chawrut?-Lernen
* Where Will We Find Refuge ... from technology overload
* Video-Vortrag: Psalm 34
* We May Have Free Will, After All
* Equal Justice for All
* Brutal Women of Nazi Germany
* Gibt es in der Unterhaltungsliteratur eine Rolle f?r G"tt?

RMB wrote:

> In any case, my reconstruction appears to be peshat in Sukkah 20a.
> Reish Laqish says "hareini kaparas R' Chiya uvanav" and then
> explains why he accords R' Chiya (or as the Y-mi and Medrash
> Rabba call him, "R' Chiya Raba") such respect. The first time the
> Torah was forgotten from Israel, Ezra came up from Bavel and
> reestablished it, when it was forgotten again, Hillel haBavli came
> up and reestablished it, and when it was forgotten, R' Chiya and
> his sons came up [also from Bavel] and established it.

There is another way to understand the specific circumstances under
which Hillel was needed, which teaches about the Benei Beteirah
interregnum, as you term it, too. This is too beautiful for a brief
post, so I suggest you all click on the following link to listen to a
fascniating leture by R'Shneier Zalman Leiman on the Dead Sea Scrolls:
http://tinyurl.com/leiman-dead-sea-1 or
http://tinyurl.com/leiman-dead-sea-2 (I am not quite sure in which of
the two lecture my point is found).

In short, and doing a tremendous injustice to his talk, there was a
period, which probably lasted decades, during which the Boethitians
were in charge of the Beit haMiqdash. They used the Dead Sea sect
calendar, which is a solar calendar, based on 364 days a year, so that
every holiday always begins on the same day of the year. Such a change
would mean that certain issues wouldn't come up (for example, 'erev
Pessach would never fall on Shabbat), or, alternatively, mean that
certain things couldn't be observed at all (how can you bring a korban
Pessach, when they hold it should be brought ten days later, for
example, and won't allow it on the right date?). Whether something was
observed the wrong way or not observed at all probably depended on how
knowledgeable one was, though Leiman does not discuss this; that is my
speculative addition.

Anyway, the net result of this galut-in-Israel was that parts of Torah
relating to the Miqdash was forgotten, and it is that which Hillel
brought back, after an exile that lasted for the duration of the
Boethitian rule. It is conceivable that the Benei Beteira coincide
with  this Boethitian rule, though Leiman does not discuss this,
either; this, too, is my speculative addition.

Before attacking this theory, I urge you to listen to the recordings,
so you will see his wonderful pshetl, which convinces very much as
straight peshat.

-- 
Arie Folger,
Recent blog posts on http://ariefolger.wordpress.com/
* Basler Gymnasium experimentiert mit Chawrut?-Lernen
* Where Will We Find Refuge ... from technology overload
* Video-Vortrag: Psalm 34
* We May Have Free Will, After All
* Equal Justice for All
* Brutal Women of Nazi Germany
* Gibt es in der Unterhaltungsliteratur eine Rolle f?r G"tt?

On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 01:01:52AM +0100, Arie Folger wrote:
: RMB wrote:
:> The dispute about the nature of tzimtzum is a -- and possibly
:> THE -- philosophical point of departure between the Gra and
:> Chassidus.

: THE other THE point is the nature of deveikut. Quite major
: disagreement, but nowadays quite unknown.

Except by those who were here in the era when "Forks" conversations
were common.

I would say that Livaks downplayed deveiqus altogether, keeping the
focus on sheleimus and then (2nd generation, Nefesh haChaim) declaring
deveiqus a consequence/feature of sheleimus.

Second, I think that the disagreement about deveiqus is beyachad with
the disagreement about tzimtzum. Only if we think of HQBH is Immanent,
is Chassidic deveiqus a possibility.

I would be that Chassidus focused on deveiqus and therefore drifted
to that understanding of tzimtzum. That's looking at the order each
was embraced. However, in terms of the causal chain in each completed
line of reasoning, tzimtzum is logically prior to deveiqus. And so,
the different undertandings of tzimtzum are used to explain different
notions of how man finds the Divine.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             "And you shall love H' your G-d with your whole
mi...@aishdas.org        heart, your entire soul, and all you own."
http://www.aishdas.org   Love is not two who look at each other,
Fax: (270) 514-1507      It is two who look in the same direction.

On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 12:59:49AM +0100, Arie Folger wrote:
: In short, and doing a tremendous injustice to his talk, there was a
: period, which probably lasted decades, during which the Boethitians
: were in charge of the Beit haMiqdash. They used the Dead Sea sect
: calendar, which is a solar calendar, based on 364 days a year, so that
: every holiday always begins on the same day of the year...

I heard this before. Possibly from RSZNeiman -- he lives around the corner
from the house I gre up in, and is a regular in the shul where I had my
beris, bar mitzvah, aufruf, one of my triplets' berissos, etc...

But I thought it was the Tzeduqim.

The Baisusim have no record outside of Chazal.

The Essenes aren't mentioned by Chazal.

It's possible they're the same people. A few times the Yerushalmi refers
to the Beis Issim.

But there is no indication either camp was big enough to control anything.

As for the 364 day calendar... It would fit the gemara's description of
the Tzeduqi understanding of the omer -- albeit probably not as your
rebbe taught it in school. "Mimakharas haShabbos" doesn't mean the
Sunday after the first day of Pesach, regardless of when it falls out,
but that the first day of Pesach must be Shabbos!

The Xians who set Easter on Sunday probably did as well. Although they
would have believed that Pesach was always on Friday, not Shabbos.

The Qumran group had a 364 day calendar, but we don't know who they were.

I downloaded the shiurim. I'll comment more when I have time to listen
to it.


But all that explains why they didn't know this particular din, not why
they were blown away by his making an organized science of the system
of derashah in general.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             When you come to a place of darkness,
mi...@aishdas.org        you don't chase out the darkness with a broom.
http://www.aishdas.org   You light a candle.
Fax: (270) 514-1507        - R' Yekusiel Halberstam of Klausenberg zt"l

I heard today that one should keep maariv to a minimum (no speeches) so as
to
not fast on shabat. In addition piskei teshuvot brings a minhag not to say
piyutim/mizrorim
like shalom aleichem, eshet chayil etc. before kiddush but to wait until
after hamotzi

There is a story brought about the Chafetz Chaim that whenever he had poor
guests for shabbat
he would start right away with kiddush with shalom aleichem in case they had
not
eaten all day

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20101217/34869d0c/attachment-0001.htm>

On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 11:36:36AM +0200, Eli Turkel wrote:
: There is a story brought about the Chafetz Chaim that whenever he had poor
: guests for shabbat
: he would start right away with kiddush with shalom aleichem in case they had
: not eaten all day

R' Yehudah Leib Chassman ("Reb Leibtchik Shutshinger") was there. He asked
his rebbe what was going on, and tells over the answer in these terms:

The human guests are hungry. The angelic ones are not, so they can be
made to wait.

:-)BBii!
-Micha

On 16/12/2010 8:39 PM, Micha Berger wrote:

> As for the 364 day calendar... It would fit the gemara's description of
> the Tzeduqi understanding of the omer -- albeit probably not as your
> rebbe taught it in school. "Mimakharas haShabbos" doesn't mean the
> Sunday after the first day of Pesach, regardless of when it falls out,
> but that the first day of Pesach must be Shabbos!

AIUI the Tzeduki (and Kara'i) rule is that the Omer is brought on the
first Sunday of Chag Hamatzos, even if that is the first day.  That's
how they explain the pasuk in Yehoshua which is so puzzling when trying
to fit it into our notion of when the Omer is to be brought; they say
that that year the 15th of Nissan must have been a Sunday, and so the
Omer was brought then, and Chadash could be eaten.


-- 
Zev Sero                      The trouble with socialism is that you
z...@sero.name                 eventually run out of other people?s money
                                                      - Margaret Thatcher

On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 12:07:51AM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
> AIUI the Tzeduki (and Kara'i) rule is that the Omer is brought on the
> first Sunday of Chag Hamatzos, even if that is the first day...

Naniach the Qaraim. They are /still/ meqadeish al pi re'iyah rather than
a calculated calendar. Some of their "new moon reports" are archived at
<http://www.karaite-korner.org/kknmr.shtml>. (There is also an "Abib
Report" that one could get emailed when someone in Israel reports seeing
yellow barley -- aviv.)

We have evidence of the Tzeduqim having a 364 day calendar. Schiffman
discusses it when discussing the Qumran calendar in "Reclaiming the
Dead Sea Scrolls". (The idea, aside from being Tzeduqi and (?) Qumrani,
is also in the apocryphal Sefer haYovelim.)

Also (more authoritative, but informationally just "indicative"), in Mes'
RH, all the stories about tzeduqim trying to change the date of rosh
chodesh by sending false witnesses early. It's because they had their
own calculations, designed to divide up the months among 264 days.

Perhaps the Tzeduqim still believed that if the Sanhedrin "erred" and
forced another size year, they would have to follow it. That would explain
a rule like the one you describe, but since I learned that the way the
gemara was taught to me when I was a kid doesn't fit their calendar,
I didn't think it was real.

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             A person must be very patient
mi...@aishdas.org        even with himself.
http://www.aishdas.org         - attributed to R' Nachman of Breslov
Fax: (270) 514-1507

The following is from RSRH's commentary on Bereshis 49

7 Cursed be their anger for it is fierce, and their fury, for it is 
cruel. I will divide them in Ya'akov and scatter them in Yisrael.

It is most significant that here, at the laying of the cornerstone of
the Jewish people, a curse is imposed upon any violent outburst that
runs counter to justice and morality, even if it is intended for the common
good.

All other states and nations have adopted the principle that any
action is legitimate as long as it serves the interest of the state. Acts of
cunning and violence that would be punished by ostracism or execution
if practiced by an individual for selfish gain are rewarded with laurels
and civic honors if they are committed for what is alleged to be the
welfare of the state. The laws of morality apply only in private life,
whereas in politics and diplomacy the only recognized law is that of
national self-interest.

Here, by contrast, the last will and testament on which the Jewish
people was founded pronounces a curse on cunning and violence, even
if they are used for the nation's most legitimate interests, and it sets
down for all time the doctrine that even in public life and in the promotion
of the common good, not only must the ends be pure, but so must
be the means.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20101219/485e00b1/attachment-0001.htm>

On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 08:41:21AM -0500, Prof. Levine wrote:
> It is most significant that here, at the laying of the cornerstone of
> the Jewish people, a curse is imposed upon any violent outburst that
> runs counter to justice and morality, even if it is intended for the common
> good.

Okay, so we disagree with might makes right. But I fail to seek the
connection to "...means must be pure."

Yir'avam b Yo'ash was a far from pure means, and yet EY reached its
largest under his melukhah.

The problem with focusing on purity is that it's never fully obtainable.
Besides, HQBH values the good in the mixture -- things don't just cancel
eachother out.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Man is equipped with such far-reaching vision,
mi...@aishdas.org        yet the smallest coin can obstruct his view.
http://www.aishdas.org                         - Rav Yisrael Salanter
Fax: (270) 514-1507

I am admittedly way behind in Avoda, and my apologies if this source was
already provided, but on the interpretation of shamayim as being a
derivative of sham/thereness, this idea was already suggested by Sforno on
his commentary to the very first pasuk of the Torah.

He writes that the etymology of the word Shamayim is indeed derived from
the word Sham, which ostensibly implies a powerful idea that the Torah's
focus and point of departure is from this world/the Earth with the heavens
being far and away; to my mind, this is a poignant and lexical
manifestation of Lo Bashamayim Hi.

B'virkat HaTorah,
David

RMB wrote:
> But in the case of shamayim, all derashos about eish+mayim aside,
> I think it's sham+ayim, yeilding "thereness". There, as in not here, a
> place I am not at. Thus shamayim is a term referring to places I
> can't reach.

RAF wrote:
That is exactly how R' Yaakov Meidan, quoting R' Yoel Bin Nun, in the
former's shiurim on Kohelet, interprets shamayim, from shamim,
"theres" or as you put it, "thereness."


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20101221/49aea8ea/attachment-0001.htm>

[Post slightly modified so as to elude people Googling for remarks to
bolster their prejudice. -micha]

R' Joseph Kaplan (on Areivim):
> Assuming Rn' Toby is right that there will be some members of a non-O
> chevrah who are not halachically Jewish, but assuming that the rituals they
> perform are in accordance with halacha (I'm not willing to assume anything
> one way or the other about their belief in God, the soul or olam haba and I
> don't believe Rn' Toby has any real basis for her statements about those
> issues), ISTM that because of the increase in the number of non-O chevrot,
> people who previously would not have had a ritually correct tahara (actions,
> not thoughts and beliefs) are now having one.  That makes this a positive
> development as I see it.

Isn't it considered Bizayon HaMeis for a [nachri] to be involved in any
aspect of the Kevurah? 

KT,
MYG

 

Moshe Y. Gluck asked:
> Isn't it considered Bizayon HaMeis for a [nachri] to be involved in
> any aspect of the Kevurah?

I don't know, but I would assume that even if it is, it is less of
a bizayon if the niftar/ret has a taharah than if s/he doesn't --
and that, I think, is what we are really talking about. More chevrot
performing more (ritually) halachic taharot still seems to me to be a
positive development, no matter what the denominational affiliation of
the members and sponsor of the chevrah are.

Joseph Kaplan

moved over from an areivim thread due to content turning to a more
torah-oriented point...

On 21/12/2010 4:31 AM, Moshe Y. Gluck wrote:
> I think it's fair to say that Chareidi/Yeshivish/Chasidic women don't, as a
> rule, wash Mayim Acharonim either. Which (that at least 50% of religious
> Klal Yisroel don't wash Mayim Acharonim) tells me that the Minhag is not to
> wash, and that those who do are being Machmir.

why not?
if mayim achronim is a chova, as the SA says (not my minhag personally,
but not the point), where is the exemption for women? Does mayim sdomis,
or the chiyuv, not apply to women somehow?

Kol tuv
Rafi Goldmeier

On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 04:44:03PM +0200, Goldmeier wrote:
> if mayim achronim is a chova, as the SA says (not my minhag personally,
> but not the point), where is the exemption for women? Does mayim sdomis,
> or the chiyuv, not apply to women somehow?

Tosafos note that even in their day, Ashk considered mayim achronim (MA)
non-obligatory. They say this is because we don't use melach sedomis.

In the Bavli (Berakhos 53b, Chullin 105a-b, Eiruvin 17b -- Chullin and
Eiruvin are pretty much identical), there are two reasons given for MA:
melakh sedomis (found in all gemaras), and a comparison to mayim rishonim
(only in Berakhos). For Tosafos' rationale to work, one would be ignoring
the mayim rishonim and thus taharah motive. Which, conveniently enough,
matches the Tanchuma, which only has

Which would make this an instance of a pattern noted by historians of
halakhah: many machloqesin between Ashk and Seph date back to EY vs
Bavel. This is consistent with beliefs about migration -- that that a
significant segment of Ashk (probably a majority) came from EY (via Italy
and to some extent Greece), whereas Seph is nearly entirely from Bavel.

And the genetic survey published last summer shows that the major
split in genetics isn't due to the small number of founding Ashkenazi
mothers. The big split is between Roman and Parthian empires. Syrian
Jews are more genetically similar to Ashkenazim than to Sepharadim or
most other of the Middle Eastern communities because their ancestors
were in the Roman empire, and thus married more often with the Jews in
Israel and Italy who later settled Ashkenaz.

See http://www.cell.com/AJHG/retrieve/pii/S0002929710002466

    Abraham's Children in the Genome Era: Major Jewish Diaspora Populations
    Comprise Distinct Genetic Clusters with Shared Middle Eastern Ancestry

    Gil Atzmon, Li Hao, Itsik Pe'er, Christopher Velez, Alexander Pearlman,
    Pier Francesco Palamara, Bernice Morrow, Eitan Friedman, Carole Oddoux,
    Edward Burns and Harry Ostrer

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Man is equipped with such far-reaching vision,
mi...@aishdas.org        yet the smallest coin can obstruct his view.
http://www.aishdas.org                         - Rav Yisrael Salanter
Fax: (270) 514-1507

Shu"t Shevet Halevi 4,23- Me'ikar hadin there is no difference between 
men and women
The minhag of women not to wash is based on the nowadays there is no 
chiyuv, and those who do it are machmir on themselves and women did not 
take on this chumra.

menucha

>
> why not?
> if mayim achronim is a chova, as the SA says (not my minhag personally,
> but not the point), where is the exemption for women? Does mayim sdomis,
> or the chiyuv, not apply to women somehow?
>
> Kol tuv
> Rafi Goldmeier
>
>

R' Ari Zivotofsky's column on MA:
http://www.ou.org/publications/ja/5762winter/legaleas.pdf

He clearly leans more machmir than common practice (in the circles I
move in, at least).

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

On 20/12/2010 11:01 PM, Moshe Y. Gluck wrote:

> Isn't it considered Bizayon HaMeis for a [nachri] to be involved in any
> aspect of the Kevurah?

Lechatchila, yes.  But is it me'akev?  Isn't it far better to be buried
by such a chevra, in which such a person may well be a member, than to
just be buried by a random funeral home doing who-knows-what?


-- 
Zev Sero                      The trouble with socialism is that you
z...@sero.name                 eventually run out of other people?s money
                                                      - Margaret Thatcher


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 27, 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..."