Avodah Mailing List

Volume 28: Number 55

Fri, 08 Apr 2011

• 1. Re: Birkat HaIlanot (Shoshana L. Boublil)
• 2. Re: How do Chazal calculate a king's reign? (kennethgmiller@juno.com)
• 3. Re: Parshas Tazria: Rav Shamshon Raphael Hirsch - When The Whole World Goes White (Prof. Levine)
• 4. Re: colors in the gemara (Elazar M. Teitz)
• 5. Re: Chumros (Micha Berger)
• 6. Re: Women and Tallis (Micha Berger)
• 7. Re: Women and Tallis (Micha Berger)
• 8. Re: TIDE, Rabbeinu Tam style (Micha Berger)
• 9. Re: The Singular Way Of Saying Kaddish (Mandel, Seth)
• 10. Re: talis qoton (Mandel, Seth)
• 11. Re: talis qoton (Mandel, Seth)
• 12. Re: The Singular Way Of Saying Kaddish (Poppers, Michael)
• 13. Re: The Singular Way Of Saying Kaddish (Zev Sero)
• 14. torah u_mada conference (Eli Turkel)
• 15. Re: torah u_mada conference (Micha Berger)
• 16. Re: torah u_mada conference (Micha Berger)

As a fellow urbanite, this is indeed why I felt it so important to post
this, when I first realized that 7 HaMinim are not just "common" Israeli
fruit but that the actual Jewish calendar, halachot and Hagim are
interdependent with their lifecycle.

 

For example ( I had thought to save this for Shavu'ot) the Bikkurim on
Shavu'ot are brought from 7 Ha Minim. BUT.. They do not give fruit
throughout Israel at Shavu'ot. In some areas, they give fruit earlier, in
some later.

 

Only by having Jews come to Beit HaMikdash from ALL OVER ISRAEL on Shavu'ot,
each bringing the fruit in their area that is ready - can all the minim be
brought at the same time to Beit HaMikdash.

 

Thus Bikkurim promotes not only internal tourism, but more importantly -
Jewish brotherhood.

 

Shoshana L. Boublil

 

 

Subject: RE: [Avodah] Birkat HaIlanot

 

Simply put:  while every fruit must be preceded by a blossom, fig blossoms
are particularly well hidden, to the point that I (city boy that I am with
very limited fig-exposure) I thought they had none.

 

The pasuk, as I tried to say, indicates that in other times besides that
being described, figs do have blossoms. 

 

Gershon
gershon.du...@juno.com



____________________________________________________________
 <http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3132/4d9cc0495a8a65dd52est02vuc&g
 t; Obama
Urges Refinance
If you owe under $729k you probably qualify for Obama's Refi Programs
 <http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3132/4d9cc0495a8a65dd52est02vuc>
SeeRefinanceRates.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110407/4120c940/attachment-0001.htm>

R' Arie Folger (responding to RDIsrael) wrote:

> Not necessarily. The dates in Tanakh could be according to how
> the respective surrounding cultures were proclaiming the years
> of their kings.

If we focus on how this was recorded in Tanach, then we lose the context of my question. Namely:

The goal of the Gemara Megilla 11b-12a is to document the 70 years of
galus, by specifying when it began and ended, in relation to the reigns of
the kings of the time. The gemara itself does the arithmetic, and the
gemara itself catches some math errors, and Rava resolves the errors by
pointing out that some years (i.e., the beginning and ending years of which
kings) overlapped.

These are not questions raised by specific rishonim, but by the Gemara
itself. The task remaining for the rishonim is to identify *which* are the
overlapping reigns. The simplest answer to that question, as I and my
chavrusa see it, is that *all* reigns overlap, except in the unusual case
of where one king's reign ended at the close of a calendar year and the
next year didn't begin until the start of the following year.

We find it strange that it is so difficult to find any commentaries who are
bothered by this. We don't regard this as deeply b'iyun study. We see
ourselves as learning this gemara in a most superficial manner. All we're
trying to do is make some sense of the gemara's numbers. Throughout the
gemara, Belshatzar's reign is given as three years, and that made some
sense when the pompous Belshatzar and Achashverosh held their partial years
to count as full years. But once Rava pointed out that we don't count that
way, it should have been obvious to everyone that Belshatzar's reign was
nowhere near three years long.

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
Groupon&#8482 Official Site
1 ridiculously huge coupon a day. Get 50-90% off your city's best!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4d9e0a90ae61661645cst02vuc

Someone pointed out to me that "in the  new chassidic circles all the 
rebbes wear white like the 2 Teitelbaum brothers. Rav Hirsch was 
indeed correct!"

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110407/2f2b4ae9/attachment-0001.htm>

 

I wrote::

< Since the asiya is only mentioned in conjunction with placing the
 g'dilim in the beged, where is there a chashash of "lo min he'asuy"
on the making of the g'dilim themselves? >

To which RMicha Berger responded:

<My understanding is that they are afraid it's not a pesil tekheiles
unless it was made in the order of melakhos given in pereq Cheileq
-- and thus presumably how tekheiles was made for the mishkan.

IOW, they must be gedilim made of pesilos made of tekheiles, and
thus the wool must already be dyed as right after nefitzah.>

     Then it's _not_ a case of ta'ase v'lo min he'asuy, but of a lack of t'cheiles.

     The chumra itself, however, would seem to be made up out of the whole
     cloth. (Pun intended.) Where is there a scintilla of a remez that the
     order of listing of m'lachos has anything to do with the definition of
     t'cheiles?  For that matter, how do we know that the order was
     followed in the mishkan itself?  And if the order of listing is meant
     to define, does that mean that in order for a loaf of bread to be pas,
     it has to be made of wheat in which the sowing preceded the plowing?

EMT


____________________________________________________________
Buying Penny Stocks?
Get The Latest Stock Alerts. Sign up For Our Free Online Newsletter!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4d9e298ed437f5f1e2bst05vuc

On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 08:25:10PM +0300, Doron Beckerman wrote:
: RMB writes:
:> To case my point into RSWolbe's terms: Rote practice without spirituality
:> is frumkeit, not the pursuit of qedushah. And perishus from the mutar
:> is supposed to be all about qedushah.

: I think we are looking at it from two different vantage points - you are
: looking at it in terms "what do I want to get out of it", and I think that
: when it comes to Rav Wolbe's frumkeit, the more relevant question is "where
: is it coming from."

: RSW begins the second paragraph of that piece with the following -
:  "Frumkeit is a natural, instinctive urge, to draw close to the Creator."
: and later - ".. the approach of frumkeit, is to  constantly feel the
: spiritual pulse, is it in a situation of closeness or distance, and to force
: himself to closeness."

AISI, RSW is focusing on avodah that is founded on da'as, and (quoting
Rabbeinu Yunah) da'as means primarily man's pursuit of deveiqus. Thus, I
saw frumkeit as someone trying for closeness without thought, reflexively,
just doing more and more in attempt to satisfy a ra'av ... lishmoa' es
divrei H', without actually looking things that actually satisfy hunger.

Whether that's someone thinking he can be yotzei-zain with just going
through the motions (my example) or someone in the chumrah-of-the-month
club (yours).

...
: A person can, must,  develop a sense of caring about the will of Hashem and
: drawing close by fulfilling it - Mitoch Daas...

And this is the basis for:
: I think we are looking at it from two different vantage points - you are
: looking at it in terms "what do I want to get out of it", and I think that
: when it comes to Rav Wolbe's frumkeit, the more relevant question is "where
: is it coming from."

Living life trying to drawing close mitokh da'as is (to my mind) looking
to do things to get holiness out of it. Which is a "place" that chumeros
could come from that actually will satisfy man's thirst for HQBH. (As
opposed to the chumrah-of-the-month-niks of Sotah 22b.

And of course they need another chumrah, and then another... because they
never manage to get what they're looking for out of the last one...

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             We are great, and our foibles are great,
mi...@aishdas.org        and therefore our troubles are great --
http://www.aishdas.org   but our consolations will also be great.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                        - Rabbi AY Kook

On Sat, Apr 02, 2011 at 10:26:17PM +0100, Chana Luntz wrote:
: I see the value in your criticism, but I have an even more fundamental
: question.  Why, even within a Brisk "halachic" world view is this not
: something that can be justified within a halachic analysis?
: 
: Chagiga 16b

(Discussion of women peforming semichah, or a partial semichah, on paros
deleted.)

But as in the example of tying the minhagim of the omer and the 3 weeks
to the forms of aveilus, RYGB doesn't actually always require that
the obligation be halachic. Rather, that it follows the forms established
by halakhah.

Which is arguably true for women who put their hands on the cow without
the ability to actually move its head any.

But not of the woman who wears a 4 cornered garment without tassles.

For that matter, I have to retract my comment about pesuqim before
Havdalah or Qabbalas Shabbos, since tefillah /is/ following the form of
a mitzvah.

But we can add our qabbalah-derived hand washing patterns.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Live as if you were living already for the
mi...@aishdas.org        second time and as if you had acted the first
http://www.aishdas.org   time as wrongly as you are about to act now!
Fax: (270) 514-1507            - Victor Frankl, Man's search for Meaning

On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 2:40 AM, I asked:
> On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 02:08:26AM +0100, Allan Engel wrote:
>: IIRC the Brisker view is to be chosheish for the Ba'al Hamaor who holds that
>: techeiles is me'aqev.

> This doesn't really put my perplexity to rest any. We have no less need
> to explain how the Baal Hamor could disagree with a mishnah.

Well, RAE pointed me off-list to a source, who in turn gives a mar'eh
maqom for the BhM of Shabbos, Rif pg 11b.

The gemara concludes that this mishnah is one tzad of a beraisa which
has a machloqes. The mishnah says einah me'aqeves like Chakhamim against
Rebbe (Menachos 38a). And so most rishonim hold the mishnah stands --
halakhah keRebbe mechaveiro, velo meikhaveirav. HOWEVER, it turns out
that the Chakhamim is R' Yitzchaq (38b). So, we're back to "halakhah
keRebbe meichaveiro", at least according to the BhM.

The BhM brings another raayah from the Hlakhos Gedolos, which omits our
mishnah.

I would think the question becomes whether R' Yitzchaq's opinion became
accepted by the Chakhamim too late for them to overrule Rebbe.

Meanwhile, the Ramban (Milkhemes Hashem on Shabbos) argues against the
BhM bringing a number of arguments. Among the Ramban's proofs is that
wearing a tallis without tekheiles is commonplace. The word he uses is
"latzeis betallis", and the "latzeis" might be a reference to melekhes
hotza'ah. Otherwise, why the mention of yetzi'ah rather than the more
natural "lilvosh"?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             What we do for ourselves dies with us.
mi...@aishdas.org        What we do for others and the world,
http://www.aishdas.org   remains and is immortal.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                        - Albert Pine

On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 09:36:17AM +0300, Akiva Blum wrote:
: > : I see Rabeinu Tam not as saying that DE is the ikar of chaim, rather, the
: > : ikar of the sentence...

: > But that doesn't fit the examples,

: I thought it fits the examples much better.
...

Given your explanation, I would agree.

So, here, he's saying that it's not the absolute iqar, but the iqar of how
to acheive a lifestyle of yofi...

(Not much difference, lemaaseh... <grin>)

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

Ben Waxman: < The minhag for hundreds of years has been for anyone to
say kaddish, so I don't if you can say that the "correct way" is for one
person only to say it.>
Please do not say "hundreds of years."	This is a (mistaken) custom that is
less than 200 years old.  The Mishna Brurah does not mention it, and
instead gives the rules for who says kaddish if there is more than one
person, meaning that IF you went according to the MB (which no one does, of
course), there would be only one person saying kaddish.

Saul Newman: <where will that  leave  the  small shul with multiple  kaddish sayers?>
Now that, of course, is the crux of the matter, and the reason why the
(mistaken) custom of several people saying it arose.  For although most of
the acharonim bring sets of rules (like the MB) for who gets to say the
kaddish, the other avelim were not willing to give it up, just like you
have quarrels about who will daven far'n omud.	Most rabbis wanted to avoid
the quarrels, and so did not protest too much when several people said it
together.  Originally they all said it in unison, and then even that was
abandoned.  In many shuls, no one can halakhically say kaddish, which
requires 9 people listening, and with many people saying, there may not be
9 listening to some or most of them.

Rabbi Seth Mandel

Daniel Israel:
<Which would seem to me to imply that if you are choshesh for the Mordechai's position you shouldn't wear a talis katan outside on  
Shabbos where there is no eruv.  I've never heard anyone suggest that chumra, although I was once advised to be machmir in the minimum shiur  
to avoid the issue of hotza'ah.>
It is well-known (or should be) that R. Chaim Brisker did not wear a talis
qoton outside on Shabbos, because he was choshesh that one is not yotze any
mitzvah with one, for a variety of reasons.  He also did not make a brokho
on wearing one, but following the Gra and others that the brokho should be
made on the talis godol.

Rabbi Seth Mandel

It had NOTHING to do with t'kheles.  The reasons, as RYBS mentioned them,
have to do with the minimum size of a talis, where is must be worn, and how
it must be worn.
As I am sure has been discussed at length here, R. Chaim felt that one is
yotze l'chatt'hilla without t'kheles, and, addrabbo, would not allow the
wearing of t'kheles, not the Radzyner's nor that of the Ptil Tekhelet. 
RYBS discussed this shitto (in the name of the Beis haLevi) very eloquently
in a yohrtzeit drosho.

Rabbi Seth Mandel

-----Original Message-----
From: Mandel, Seth 
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2011 1:53 PM
To: 'avo...@lists.aishdas.org'
Subject: RE: talis qoton

Daniel Israel:
<Which would seem to me to imply that if you are choshesh for the Mordechai's position you shouldn't wear a talis katan outside on  
Shabbos where there is no eruv.  I've never heard anyone suggest that chumra, although I was once advised to be machmir in the minimum shiur  
to avoid the issue of hotza'ah.>
It is well-known (or should be) that R. Chaim Brisker did not wear a talis
qoton outside on Shabbos, because he was choshesh that one is not yotze any
mitzvah with one, for a variety of reasons.  He also did not make a brokho
on wearing one, but following the Gra and others that the brokho should be
made on the talis godol.

Rabbi Seth Mandel

In Avodah V28n54#2, RSZN wrote:
> if  reverting to this  system , where will that  leave  the  small shul 
with multiple  kaddish sayers?    they   may not mind  not  getting  the 
amud  for each tfila  , but taking the kaddish from them  as well  wont go 
over well...... <
AIUI, the one person saying Qaddish (if he isn't the Shaliach Tzibbur prior
to that Qaddish) is akin to the SHaTZ (certainly, he is "omeid lifnei
hateivah" and stands next to the SHaTZ) at and for that period of time.  As
for the alleged "chiyuv" for an aveil to constantly say Qaddish, methinks
that's a myth (and I recall someone [perhaps in the new siddur from Vienna?
or was it RBShH in the first cheileq of "Sharshei Minhag Ashk'naz" while
talking about not only the SHaTZ but also the one saying Qaddish wearing a
talis lichvod haShchinah/hatzibbur?] noting the chiyuv as once a week);
FWIW, in KAJ we said three specific chapters of T'hilim after the
weekday-Ma'ariv "Aleinu" -- if no one had a chiyuv to say Qaddish, the
SHaTZ would then say Qaddish, but this part of the davening enabled up to
three aveilim to say Qaddish after one of the three chapters. 

The minhag RDrYL outlined does, ISTM, require more dedication on behalf of
both the gabbai/gabboim (in KAJ/"Breuer's," they're called the Synagogue
Committee) and the mispalleil honored with the saying of a particular
Qaddish.  Any shul/community considering implementing this minhag would
want to consider such issues.

A gut'n Shabbes and all the best from 
-- Michael Poppers via BB pager

On 7/04/2011 1:05 PM, Mandel, Seth wrote:
> Please do not say "hundreds of years."  This is a (mistaken) custom that
> is less than 200 years old.

Really?  Less than 200 years?  When is it first mentioned?


>  The Mishna Brurah does not mention it

And yet by his time it was certainly in practise.


> In many shuls, no one can halakhically say kaddish, which requires
> 9 people listening

Mino hani mili?  Where is such a requirement written?  I know that kaddish
requires the presence of a minyan, but I have not yet seen it written
anywhere (well, except in the previous email) that one needs even one
listener, let alone nine.  Chazoras Hashatz requires nine answerers, or
else the chazzan's brochos are "korov lihyos levatoloh", i.e. not really
levatoloh but only close to being so.  But since when does that apply to
kaddish?

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

yesterday was the annual Torah u_madda conference in JCT in Jerusalem.

As short synopsis

1. R Zoldan spoke about ethics in selling and advertisements. In particular
he
discussed pressuring to buy or sell. He discussed a modern machloket whether
pressuring someone to buy (as distinct from the usual sell) is considered as
prohibited under "lo tachmod" as one wants the other person's money rather
than a specific object

He mentioned that in advertising that terms as mehadrin are very meaningless
and
advocated more transparency where the facts are given and it is up to the
consumer to
decide if he agrees with those stringencies..

2. Prof. Rosenberg discussed free will and claimed that the greatest
challeneges these
days comes from Brain science. In particular from observations that the time
between
the brain receiving information and acting is frequently less than 500
milliseconds leaving
no time for a rational decision.

3. Prof. Rabbi Dror Fixler discussed recent technological advances in
medicine and
brain science. The "easy" one being using a bionic arm using brain waves and
finally
a you-tube first demonstration of driving a car just using brain waves. He
mentioned
that he consulted with R. Rabinowitz of Maale Adumum who answered that he
could
not see any technical prohibition in driving on shabbat using brain waves.
When R. Fixler
objected that such advancements would destry shabbat R Rabinowitz answered
that
obviously society would have to set up restrictions that limited the use of
such technology to extreme cases (a similar situation exists according to
RSZA
with regard to electricity when no light/heat is generated).
A summary of this talk appeared in this weekend's Jerusalem post

Some of the afternoon contributed talks included a discussion of
writing/storing on a hard
disk on shabbat, rye flour for matzot on pesach, the change in the weight of
the shekel
over the generations (present halacha has about twice the weight of the
times of
Moshe Rabbenu). An interesting discussion of what low IQ (religious)
children think
about G-d and other religion related questions.

The panel discussion started with Prof. Weiss-Halivni presenting the
standard
discussion on academic learning and distinguishing between studies and
halacha le-maaseh.
The next speaker harshly attached Judaic sciences (translation from Hebrew)
as being neither
yahadut nor science and claimed that it was destroying much of Judaism.
The final speaker was R. Gutel who didn't agree. He pointed out that the
speakers
objection to the science part would apply to all of humanities and social
sciences and
one would need to close half the departments in all universities. He defined
judaic studies
as providing important tools that in fact should be studied in yeshivot. In
fact R. Kook
had advocated introducing much of this into his yeshiva (note the break-away
of R. Tau
from merkaz ha-rav over the introduction of modern attitudes in learning
Tanakh)
He brought a story that R. Hai Gaon asked a catholic priest for help in
translating words
in Tanakh..

shabbat shalom

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110408/2fae02f1/attachment-0001.htm>

On Fri, Apr 08, 2011 at 02:13:25PM +0300, Eli Turkel wrote:
: 2. Prof. Rosenberg discussed free will and claimed that the greatest
: challeneges these days comes from Brain science. In particular from
: observations that the time between the brain receiving information and
: acting is frequently less than 500 milliseconds leaving no time for a
: rational decision.

I already discussed Libet's experiments on list, and suggested some
responses. One thing to note is that data collected in 2009 might
show that the original results weren't all that conclusive after
all. See <http://www.consciousentities.com/?p=233>

See <http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/getindex.cgi?section=F#FREE%20WIL
L%20VS%20PHYSICS>.
(See <http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol25/v25n344.shtml#03> for quotes
from Wikipedia and Conscious Entities blog. And I collected a number of links
at <http://lists.aishdas.org/htdig.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org/2010q2/016670.ht
ml>.


1- It doesn't prove anything in the negative. IOW, perhaps free will is
a filter for which impulses are stopped before action, not which impulses
are started. "Free won't" is the term usually associated with this response.

2- The measure for how long it takes to make a conscious decision could
well be less than the time it takes to register awareness that one did
so. So, event 1, consciously deciding, takes less than Libet's 350 ms,
but event 2, noticing one decided, takes more. (And then there is a
potential event 3, noticing one noticed, if one is thinking about free
willed decision-making while deciding what to type. And now an event 4,
noticing I noticed that I noticed... But no event 5, since my mind gets
lost in that many indiractions.) From the blog entry cited above.

3- According to REED, bechirah only occurs at one nequdah, the battlefront
between yeitzer hara and yeitzer hatov, or middos, or any other conflict.
So, even if we did prove that at times we do respond without conscious
awareness doesn't rule out REED's shitah.

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             With the "Echad" of the Shema, the Jew crowns
mi...@aishdas.org        G-d as King of the entire cosmos and all four
http://www.aishdas.org   corners of the world, but sometimes he forgets
Fax: (270) 514-1507      to include himself.     - Rav Yisrael Salanter

I forgot one, because I don't buy into the idea, myself.

4- Some people suggested that bechirah chafshi doesn't require that the
decision be conscious.

:-)BBii!
-Micha


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 28, Issue 55
**************************************

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..."