Avodah Mailing List

Volume 28: Number 101

Sun, 19 Jun 2011

• 1. Re: Ehrlachkeit, not Frumkeit (Poppers, Michael)
• 2. Bittul, No Discernible Taste (Meir Rabi)
• 3. Tznius (Prof. Levine)
• 4. Re: Ehrlachkeit, not Frumkeit (Danny Schoemann)
• 5. Significance of Garments (was Tznius) (Prof. Levine)
• 6. E pluribus unum (Richard Wolberg)
• 7. More on the Significance of Clothing (Prof. Levine)
• 8. Re: Tznius (kennethgmil...@juno.com)
• 9. Re: Consumer Alert: Minhog Scams On The Rise! (Danny Schoemann)
• 10. Das Moshe or Das Yehudis (Yitz .)
• 11. Re: Tznius (T6...@aol.com)
• 12. A Shabbos of months? or hours? or ? (Michael ORR)
• 13. Re: Consumer Alert: Minhog Scams On The Rise! (Lisa Liel)

In Avodah V28n98, RAMiller asked:
> I wholeheartedly agree with this, and would love to coin a new slogan
> to help us focus on that idea. Something which can help us to realize
> that our ehrlachkeit is lacking, but without casting aspersions on
> frumkeit.... What we're really referring to is manners, common
> decency, and a realization that Bein Adam L'Chaveiro is also d'Oraisa.
> How can we communicate these ideas? This is especially difficult to people who don't appreciate that a problem even exists. <
I don't know if the "keit" portion can be modified into some sort of
imperative Yiddish verb which will communicate something, but if we can't
say "<modification of "Keit"> frum, not 'frumkeit'!" then at least we
can skip the imperative-verb thought and stick to "Frum, not 'frumkeit'!"

In the subsequent digest, RDrYL noted:
> Please see my article <http://www.jewishpress.com/pageroute.do/19683>
"Frum or Ehrliche?" <
Indeed, when it comes to axioms, I prefer RYBreuer's "Glatt Yoshor, not
'glatt kosher'!" (Pace R'Micha -- I'll note your http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2006/03/rav-breuer-glatt-kosher-gla
tt-yoshor_21.shtml page, but I'll also note that RYB saw no need for
'glatt' meat if the entities being supervised were "yashar.")  Such an
axiom brings us full-circle to R'Micha ZGG thoughts. 

Gut Voch/Shavua Tov and all the best from 
-- Michael Poppers via BB pager

Indeed, you identify the mis-understanding that drives some people to draw
all the water they use for Pesach prior to Pesach since prior to Pesach it
will become Battel.

This is the issue that HaRav Auerbach is clarifying. Afilu BeElef Lo Battel
means not that it is NEVER Battel but that it is not Battel as long as it is
humanly discernible BY TASTE (what other device did Chazal have at their
disposal?). It must be by taste simply because that is the only value that
is relevant in Halacha.

But the astounding observation remains that when taste is utterly not
discernible the mixture will certainly be Kosher, irrespective of the
proportions.

R Eli Turkel wrote, I understood that RSZA meant that discernible meant
detectable by means available to chazal not necessarily taste.

I have trouble understanding those that disagree. If Mashehu is
taken literally I am sure that with a fine enough microscope one can find
chametz  in everything. ie baking matzot there are chametz particles in the
air from a nearby bakery in extremely small portions

In response to my posting

<<HaRav Sh Z, explains that although Chamets during Pesach is not
Battel 1:1000, nevertheless it is Battel when it is not at all discernible.
This
means that at 1:1000 it is still discernible. Consequently 1:60 is
certainly discernible. Now this is strange since 1:60 is the rule of thumb
at which we assume taste is no longer discernible.>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110619/ef3139d2/attachment-0001.htm>

At 07:34 AM 6/19/2011, Rn T. Katz wrote:
>
>It doesn't matter what you find in books or teshuvos, I'm telling you
>reality -- whatever they base themselves on, this is what women do:
>

Still, the point (question) is what is the Halacha, not what women do.

People (not just women) do all sorts of things that are not 
necessarily in accordance with the halacha.  This does not make them 
"right" does it?

My understanding is that a woman's skirt is supposed to be long 
enough so that when she sits down her knees do not show.  Yet it is 
the "fashion" here in Flatbush for many women to wear skirts that 
just come to the knee when they are standing.  This is what women do, 
but it is not correct, is it?

YL
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110619/7f8dab2c/attachment-0001.htm>

In the "Consumer Alert: Minhog Scams On The Rise!"  thread, R' Micha
Berger wrote:

>> We live in an era ... where there is too much focus on
>> frumkeit rather than ehrlachkeit and yesodei haTorah.

R' Akiva Miller then continued:

> I wholeheartedly agree with this, and would love to coin a
> new slogan to help us focus on that idea.

Something original like "Derech Eretz Kodmo L'Torah" or "Im ein DE ein
Torah" or "Yofe TT im DE"  or (said in a cynical tone "Derech Etz?
Plishtim!")

> Something which
> can help us to realize that our ehrlachkeit is lacking, but
> without casting aspersions on frumkeit.

We'll ignore the obvious; if your not Ehrlich you are not Frum, you're Fake.

> But I want to be prepared for arguments and backlash.
> Many, for example, will point to the proliferation of chesed
> organizations as an example of ehrlachkeit.

I love these new-era Chessed organisations. "I have this Chessed
organisation. I need your time and/or money to run it. Meanwhile I'll
start another one while you run mine - even though you don't care /
are not cut out for this type of Chessed. But now I've done a double
Chessed; I got you involved in a Chessed."

I kid you not, this happened to my wife once... took her a while to
find somebody who was prepared to inherit this Chessed.

Reminds me of the fellow who hitched a ride with me a while back and
on his way out the door says "you need to thank me for providing you
with the opportunity to do a Chessed." I was relieved that he didn't
bill me.

> But that's not
> what we're talking about, is it? What we're really referring
> to is manners, common decency, and a realization that
> Bein Adam L'Chaveiro is also d'Oraisa.
>
> How can we communicate these ideas? This is especially
> difficult to people who don't appreciate that a problem even exists.

[Predictably] I would suggest concentrating on learning and spreading
Halocho. Simple old fashioned "no frills, no Chumros" Halocho. Seforim
like the Kitzur SA fit the bill; learn it and relearn it and start
becoming an expert in "the basics".

Seforim like the Mishna Brura have the following "drawbacks":

- You forget there are another 3 Chalokim to Shulchan Aruch
(especially the Bein Odom L'Chaveiro section); the Chofetz Chaim wrote
numerous Seforim about Bein Odom L'Chaveiro - but only mentions it
by-the-way when appropriate in the MB.

- Many of his non-OC Psakim are hard to find. Anybody know where the
MB talks about the Halachot of haircuts and Payot? (Answer: 252:2 in
the Biur Halocho *Afilu MiSapar Yisroel - Vol 3 page 30)

- He brings "too many" opinions and (unless you know and remember the
rules of how to "read" MB) you "play it safe" and keep all opinions
that he mentions. This itself can start chipping away at your
Ehrlichkeit... as opinions can contradict each other.

- There's way too much to learn and remember. Halachicly your memory
is valid for a year, so you need something you can review yearly. I
find that I can easily review the entire KSA 3 - 4 times a year by
spending 10 minutes/day on it daily after Maariv and the occasional 30
minutes while waiting for the Doctor/Chuppa/ etc.

- It's a commentary to an existing work, so you get confusing
commentary. E.g. in 261 the Mechaber talks about Shabbes starting long
after the visible sunset, as per Rabbeinu Tam. The MB explains that
and insists that we need to start Shabbes before visible sunset;
preferably 20-30 minutes before (MB 261:2:(23)) - then you wonder what
happens to Ehrlichkeit... :-)

 <Gets off soapbox>

- Danny

At 07:34 AM 6/19/2011, R. Micha wrote:

>In any case, I find this thread interesting... RYL raised the question of
>why so much more attention is paid to hilkhos tzeni'us WRT women, and the
>thread takes a detour -- to pay attention to hilkhos tzeni'us WRT women!

Micha's point is well taken. and I am one of 
those who veered the discussion from tznius for 
men to hilchos tznius WRT women.

In an attempt to get back on track a bit I would 
like to bring attention to what RSRH writes in 
part in his commentary on the last few pesukim in 
Shalach that deal with Tzitzis (Bamidbar 15: 37 - 
41).  His approach to garments applies both to 
men and women and perhaps this is a "gender free" way to view tznius

To find the meaning of the tzitzis on our garments, we must first investigate
the significance of garments themselves. This is especially necessary
since the name of the tzitzis describes not only its external appearance ?
threads ?sprouting? from the garment ? but also its symbolic purpose, as
Scripture explicitly says: v'haya  Lochem 
l'tzitzis (v. 39; ). The implication, then, is clear:
Through the tzitzis the human garment should 
?sprout,? that is, blossom forth and bear the fruit for which
it is intended. Tzitzis hak'nof  tells us: Your garment should not be something
barren; do not clothe yourselves vainly and thoughtlessly in human garments;
let the garment fulfill the purpose for which it was given to you!

There is a close relation between our clothing and our moral calling
as human beings. This is evident from the historical origin of clothing
(Bereshis 3:7 and 3:21; see Commentary there). The sin that preceded
[the giving of the first garments to Adam and Chavah] ? against which
the garment is meant to protect ? mirrors the sin mentioned above in
verse 39. Indeed, these two sins are not only related and similar, but are
virtually identical. It appears, then, that the conceptual connection could
hardly be more obvious. We need only consider what is stated there ?
When the woman saw that the tree was good for food and tempting
to the sight, and that the tree was a delight to contemplate,(Bereshis 3:6)
? to understand that man transgressed God?s command because he
strayed after his heart and eyes,  and regarded as
?good,?  anything that, in the judgment of his greedy eye and his
sensual-gratification-seeking mind, would provide him with satisfaction.
By thus following the dictates of his eyes and heart, he sank to the level
of intelligence of the animal, which, in choosing what to pursue and what
to avoid, is guided solely by the inclination of its heart and the perception
of its eyes. Thereupon came the sense of shame, which is the Divine voice
within man. This voice instructed man to cover his animal nakedness,
and the instruction was confirmed by God when He provided man with
garments. With a garment God banished man from Paradise, and with
a garment He warns man at all times that his destiny is higher than that
of an animal; he must submit his power of judgment to the dictates of a
higher Authority, and learn from Him what is ?good? and what is ?evil.?

This, then, is the admonition ? translated into words ? inherent in
man?s clothing: so that you may see them and remember all the commandments of
God and carry them out, and not go exploring after your own heart
and after your own eyes [and], following them, become unfaithful to
Me.That is also the message of the tzitzis ?sprouting
from the garment?: it demands of man to obey the admonishment inherent
in human clothing.

Man?s clothing has dual significance. It is beged; by covering the animal
aspect of the human body, it reveals that man has been endowed with a
moral character. At the same time, it is also k'sus; it covers the body and
protects it against the elements of the physical world.

When man?s moral weakness became apparent, he needed clothing
to remind him of his moral clothing. At the same time, he also needed
k'sus. For God?s educative love drove him out of the pleasant harmony of
paradisaic nature. Thereupon the earth?s nature became hostile to him,
the earth producing for him only thorns and thistles. He now needed
protective clothing, for he had to carry out the mission common to all
mankind under the most diverse climatic conditions.



Yitzchok Levine 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110619/cf3c15fb/attachment-0001.htm>

The discussion regarding "All Ye Into The Melting Pot,"  "Minhogim Vs. Minhag Avos,"  "Minhogim Fads Vs. Mesorah," etc. 
is fascinating and complex. As you can see by the wide divergence of opinions, it raises many questions. However, an insight 
I gained from studying the various postings and opinions is that we have never been a monolithic religion. Hillel and Shammai 
are examples of the differences. Throughout the gemara we see a wide divergence of opinions. I would say that the term 
"Unity in Diversity" is an apt description of Torah and Judaism. We see this concept with the Arba'ah Banim as well as with 
the Arba Minim. We have ten fingers and ten toes. If you were to examine the fingerprints and toe prints from just one person, 
you would discover that each one was different from the other. Nevertheless, they are unified. Rather than criticize individual minhogim,
we should recognize the beauty and meaning in each. Because your minhog is different from mine, doesn't make it repulsive.
ri


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110619/4c925a9b/attachment-0001.htm>

Please see http://tinyurl.com/3sm5jpo

The creator of this pdf file writes

"The following information and insights were gleaned from the 
writings of Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch, The Collected Writings 
Volume III, 2nd edition, 1988, by Rabbi Dr. Joseph Breuer Foundation. 
All italicized quotations are taken directly from Rabbi Hirsch, while 
the text written in normal font are simply additional insights and 
comments from me, Michal Daniel.

I wrote out this information in order to educate others with regard 
to tzitziyot, and the deeper symbolic meaning attached to them. Most 
people would not have time to read the entire writings of Rabbi 
Hirsch, but the valuable insights he presents are worth considering 
and have been condensed for your edification below. However, for 
those interested in understanding Hebraic symbolism, I strongly 
recommend obtaining a copy of Rabbi Hirsch's book listed above."

There are sections on Our Garments and the History of Clothing.  This 
serves to put clothing within a religious framework which in my mind 
should be tied to any discussion of tznius for both men and women.

Yitzchok Levine 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110619/3a8d6f8b/attachment-0001.htm>

R' Micha Berger wrote:

> ... I find this thread interesting... RYL raised the question of
> why so much more attention is paid to hilkhos tzeni'us WRT women,
> and the thread takes a detour -- to pay attention to hilkhos
> tzeni'us WRT women!

I noticed that too. Here's what I'm confused about: "Tznius" comprises (at least) two sub-topics: Tznius in one's clothing, and tznius in one's actions.

As regards, tznius in one's actions, we have a general focus on not drawing
attention to oneself, and that applies both to men and women, although I
suppose if one invokes "kol kvuda bas Melech pnima" then it applies to
women moreso, but even then it is only a matter of degree, and I don't know
if one can point to areas where it would apply only to the women, except
(as we have mentioned before) men *have* to reluctantly take the spotlight
in leadership roles or else we'd have no leaders.

But as regard tznius in clothing, my understanding is that there is very
little to talk about regarding the men. The halachic minimum is covered by
a bathing suit, and there is no concept parallel to "das yehudis" for the
men. Or am I mistaken?

And that's why this thread - which was started by RYL with a quote from
another website which spoke *only* about tznius in clothing - ended up
being about women (in my opinion).

Akiva Miller


____________________________________________________________
Get Free Email with Video Mail & Video Chat!
http://www.juno.com/freeemail?refcd=JUTAGOUT1FREM0210

>On a practical basis, I wonder how it works at Mincha; do people pay
>close attention to the chatzi kaddish after Ashrei, to see whether
>the chazan says "v'yatzmach purkanei", so that they'll know whether
>to say "N'kadesh" or "Nakdishach" at Kedusha?

Huh? Why would the congregation be saying something which belongs to
the Chazzen?

I don't if this has been discussed here, but the tznius conversation led me
to the following question.
If a community starts keeping a "chumra" in tznius because of a mistaken
belief that it is absolutely required, does that become 'das yehudis' or is
it only something that is accepted as minhag or chumra that becomes das
yehudis?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110619/819f42bc/attachment-0001.htm>

Old TK:
> RZ in Israel and some Lubavitchers and some borderline RW in  America 
> often wear ankle-length skirts, but mainly for fashion.  

> In the past ten or twenty years, there has been a kind of fashion  
> movement among certain groups of RZ in Israel who have been influenced  
> by the chareidi community.  Their conscience no longer lets them  go 
> bare-legged, because of the way chareidi women and chardal women  
> dress, but they don't want to wear stockings either, so in this group  
> you do see the pattern you've mentioned -- long skirts with sandals,  
> no stockings. 

From: menucha _m...@inter.net.il_ (mailto:m...@inter.net.il) 
> sorry to confuse your speculation with the facts but the  reason we wear
> long skirts is halachic. based on the more machmir opinion of  definition
> of shok.

"We"? You and how many others? Yes I know that there are RW RZ who
a) hold that legs must be covered down to the ankle and b) hold that
a long skirt, without stockings, fulfills that requirement. But that
psak is very recent; it definitely had not been promulgated yet in the
'80's or '90's, when you first started seeing that look among the RZ.
And even today it is the look of only a very small percentage of RZ and
almost zero percent of MO in America. (And BTW do you actually hold that
it is assur to wear transparent stockings? that the calf is part of the
"shok" and thus the bare-toed RZ maidens are actually more tzniusdik
than the chareidi women who cover their shins AND toes with stockings?!)

The norm among RW and chareidi women is not to go bare-toed, regardless
of how long the skirt is. And the norm among the majority of RZ is to go
bare-legged and bare-toed regardless of how long or short the skirt is.
I salute you and those women like you who follow the psak that you do,
but that psak followed the adoption of this practice on the part of the
more religious RZ -- it did not precede it.

Of course as I recently said on Areivim, there is an enormous spread of
practice and belief among the MO and RZ.

Personally I wish we could all just be normal, wear skirts below the
knee and not wear stockings at all except when we want to look dressy.

RMB was upset that we took a thread about men's tznius and went straight
back to talking about women's tznius -- though it was RYL and not you
or I who changed the subject.

But I will say that I don't understand why men have to wear socks for
davening, either. My husband is a kohen and on duchening days he makes
sure to wear socks without holes. He doesn't want to gross anyone out,
least of all his Maker. And yet if he were doing the avodah in the BHM'K,
even if he were the kohen gadol in resplendant golden and torquoise
costume with a mitznefes on his head -- he'd be running around barefoot.

And did women's stockings or socks even exist back then? They certainly
didn't have nylon or polyester, I guess they could have made socks from
wool, but did they? Does the Gemara ever talk about women (or men)
wearing socks or stockings?

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

Judaism has a Shabbos of days (yom hashabbos), a Shabbos of weeks (shevuous), a 
Shabbos of years (shmitah), and a Shabbos of shemitahs (yovel).
I am wondering about whether there is any tradition of Shabbos with respect to 
other units of time.
A SHABBOS OF MONTHS
A Shabbos of months seems very suggestive.? ?The Jewish year has two new years 
of creation, (Nissan and Tishrei ? as per RH 10-11), the month of each of which 
is the seventh month counting from the other.? ??Tishrei is the seventh month 
from Nissan and Nissan is the seventh month from Tishrei.
As such we can conceive of the Jewish year as a thirteen month cycle comprised 
of two overlapping ?Shabbos of months? cycles, (and each year similarly overlaps 
by a month with the adjacent year.)? Each cycle begins with a New Year and 
culminates in a seventh sabbatical festive month, which in turn marks the first 
month of the new cycle .? 

An alternative way to view the cycles would be to see each of the two half-year 
periods as running from one solstice to the next, and containing a cycle of 
holidays (not in exactly the same form or order) that parallel each other in 
many significant respects, with each cycle being ?centred on a seven day 
festival at approximately the time of the equinox, beginning at the time of the 
full moon, that embodies and gives expression to the character of the cycle.? 
The spring festival is Passover, the festival of Aviv, coming from the root ?av? 
(aleph beis) or ?father? .? The fall festival is Sukkos, the festival of the 
?tvuas haaretz?, (Lev. 23:39) with ?tvuah being based on the mirror root? ?ba? 
(beis aleph).? 

A SHABBOS OF HOURS
If the 12 month year can be understood as made up of Shabbos cycles, than how 
about a 24 hour day, made up of two 12 hour cycles, each in turn comprised of 
two Shabbos of hour cycles.? Shabbos hours would commence at sunrise, chatzos ha 
yom and ha laila, and sunset.
QUESTION.? 
Can anyone point to sources where these ideas might be?discussed and developed, 
or at least to possible supports (or non-supports)??? So far I have just seen 
suggestive shreds, e.g. in the Sfas Emes (comparing Yom Kippur and Purim ? Yom 
K?Purim) and in the Rambam, comparing the Atzeres of Shevuous with the Atzere of 
Shemini of Sukkos.? But the ideas seems too compelling to have been overlooked.
Michael Orr, Toronto
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110619/89a34384/attachment-0001.htm>

At 08:57 AM 6/19/2011, Danny Schoemann wrote:
>> On a practical basis, I wonder how it works at Mincha; do people pay
>> close attention to the chatzi kaddish after Ashrei, to see whether
>> the chazan says "v'yatzmach purkanei", so that they'll know whether
>> to say "N'kadesh" or "Nakdishach" at Kedusha?

>Huh? Why would the congregation be saying something which belongs to
>the Chazzen?

Every place I daven, everyone says the chazzan's parts in an 
undertone, after which the chazzan says them out loud.



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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 28, Issue 101
***************************************

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..."