Avodah Mailing List

Volume 28: Number 125

Tue, 05 Jul 2011

• 1. Re: Mi Ban Siach (Arie Folger)
• 2. a math/calendar question (Eli Turkel)
• 3. Re: Mi Ban Siach (Micha Berger)
• 4. Re: a math/calendar question (Micha Berger)
• 5. Re: a math/calendar question (Simon Montagu)
• 6. Re: Mi Ban Siach (Arie Folger)
• 7. Soup (Aryeh Herzig)
• 8. R Hirsch and MO (Prof. Levine)
• 9. kol for winemaking and besamim (David Riceman)
• 10. Re: Mi Ban Siach (Micha Berger)
• 11. Re: your mail (Micha Berger)
• 12. Re: R Hirsch and MO (Yitz .)
• 13. Re: R Hirsch and MO (Prof. Levine)
• 14. (no subject) (Harvey Benton)
• 15. correct intentions vis a vis yaakov (Harvey Benton)
• 16. Shabbat Mincha ? No Ties (Prof. Levine)
• 17. Re: Consumer alert:minhog scams on the rise! (Elazar M. Teitz)

Hi,

I just discovered the follwing unfinished reply in my drafts folder,
which I am now submitting.

RZS wrote:
> now that I think of it shouldn't be a problem; first we invoke
> Hashem's blessings, and only then those of a basar vadam.

Even better, we call up9on the gedol hatzibbur, the talmid 'hakham, to
pronounce G"d's blessing upon the couple, IOW bridge between Mi Adir
and the couple, or draw them close, at this solemn moment, to the Mi
Adir. These are, therefore, two matching lines, because they are two
parts of a whole. Hence the similar ending (hu yevarekh).

RMB wrote:
> I already mentioned why I reached a different conclusion. The medrash
compares the mevareikh to the shoshan itself. So then why, "Mi bon"?

No, the Shoshan is Knesset Yisrael and siach Shoshan 'hokhim is the
talk of the Shoshan, i.e. Torah. So who knows Torah best? The talmid
'hakham, and he comes to pronounce the blessings. That is also in line
with the gemara about what a talmmid 'hakham needs o know, according
to R' 'Hananya bar Shlamya in the name of Rav
(http://he.wikisource.org/wiki/%D7%97%D7%95%D7%9C%D7%99%D7%9F_%D7%98_
%D7%90
).

Kol tuv,
-- 
Arie Folger,
Recent blog posts on http://ariefolger.wordpress.com/
* Meditating on the Tragedy in Japan
* Ode an das Pessachfest und den Fr?hling
* Denkmal an den deportierten l?rracher Juden
* Holiday Art
* Will the Judge of the Entire World Not Do Justice?
* When Theodicy Is No Theodicy

In pitum kattoret we say that the ketrorot cam from 368 manot, 365
during the (solar) year and 3 on yom kippur.

However, YK is one of the 365 days. So there should be a total of 367 not 368

-- 
Eli Turkel

On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 12:08:08PM +0200, Arie Folger wrote:
:> I already mentioned why I reached a different conclusion. The medrash
:> compares the mevareikh to the shoshan itself. So then why, "Mi bon"?

: No, the Shoshan is Knesset Yisrael and siach Shoshan 'hokhim is the
: talk of the Shoshan, i.e. Torah..

But that's not what the medrash in question says -- if we agree that
"Mi Bon" is based on Shir haShirim Rabba 2:4:

    R' Chanan deTziporei applied the reading in megilas chasidim:

    It is the way of the world for 10 men to enter a beis aveil and are
    not able to open their mouths to bentch birkhas aveilim, and one
    comes and opens his mouth and blesses birkhas aveilim. To what is
    he compared? To a "shoshanah bein hachochim."

    And also, it is the way of the world for 10 men to enter a beis
    mishteh and are not able to open their mouths to bentch birkhas
    chasanim, and one comes and opens his mouth and blesses birkhas
    chasanim. To what is he compared? To a "shoshanah bein hachochim."

Then a third iteration about those who are able "lifros al Shema velaavor
lifnei hateiva."

It seems clear to me that in all three contexts the one-in-a-minyan who
knows how to daven is being compared to the shoshanah.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             A cheerful disposition is an inestimable treasure.
mi...@aishdas.org        It preserves health, promotes convalescence,
http://www.aishdas.org   and helps us cope with adversity.
Fax: (270) 514-1507         - R' SR Hirsch, "From the Wisdom of Mishlei"

On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 01:01:49PM +0300, Eli Turkel wrote:
: In pitum kattoret we say that the ketrorot cam from 368 manot, 365
: during the (solar) year and 3 on yom kippur.
: 
: However, YK is one of the 365 days. So there should be a total of 367
: not 368

I think on YK there was the usual qetores on the mizbeiach hazahav in
addition to the qetores the KG takes lifnai velifnim.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Eli Turkel <elitur...@gmail.com> wrote:

> In pitum kattoret we say that the ketrorot cam from 368 manot, 365
> during the (solar) year and 3 on yom kippur.
>
> However, YK is one of the 365 days. So there should be a total of 367 not
> 368
>
>
Surely the 3 manot for YK are in addition to the daily mana, which was
offered on YK as well.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110705/9f4ca2fb/attachment-0001.htm>

On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 12:30 PM, Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org> wrote:
> It seems clear to me that in all three contexts the one-in-a-minyan who
> knows how to daven is being compared to the shoshanah.

Context, context, context .. and larger context.

From the context (as well as from traditional use of the shoshan
imagery), it is clear that the shoshana is the entire congregation of
Israel. Just look at the same midrash Shir haShirim, at the text right
before and after the paragraph we deal with 2:1, 2:2, 2:3, 2:5 and
2:6. (OK, in 2:1, the point is a bit more subtle, as Yitz'haq and
Ya'aqov have to personify all of Israel)

Rather, what is meant in 2:4 is that the one who davens knows the
language of the Shoshan, and therefore, when he comes to the fore and
blesses the couple, all of Israel becomes beautified and the contrast
keshoshana bein ha'ho'him applies.

-- 
Arie Folger,
Recent blog posts on http://ariefolger.wordpress.com/
* Meditating on the Tragedy in Japan
* Ode an das Pessachfest und den Fr?hling
* Denkmal an den deportierten l?rracher Juden
* Holiday Art
* Will the Judge of the Entire World Not Do Justice?
* When Theodicy Is No Theodicy

Why do you assume that soup is not a Mashke?

There are, actually, two conflicting Psukim from TaNaCh:

Breshit 25:34 "Lechem U'Nzid Adashim Vayochal VaYesht"  Bread and lentil
soup and he ate and he drank.

Melachim II 4:40 "VaYehi B'Ochlom MeHaNazid" And it was when they ate from
the soup.

(Blood is also sometimes drunk (this weeks's Parsha) and sometimes eaten
(Parshat Aharei).)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110705/0c7c2edb/attachment-0001.htm>

At 05:40 AM 7/5/2011, Yitz wrote:

>I have never been able to get a proper delineation of what exactly MO is and
>isn't, so please forgive me if I am misunderstanding, but I had one
>question.

I really doubt that anyone can come up with a precise definition of 
MO that most people would agree with.  My own tongue in cheek 
definition of MO is anyone who keeps Shabbos and has indoor plumbing. >:-}

>AIUI, RSRH viewed education and culture as positive only in their
>ability to enhance ones knowledge of and dedication to a Torah life, (GR"A
>felt the same btw), unless I'm misunderstanding. Is that also the MO outlook
>on science and culture?

The following are selections from RSRH"s essay
<http://www.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/relevance_se
cular_studies_jewish_education.pdf>The 
Relevance of Secular Studies to Jewish Education (Collected Writings VII)

In the present essay we will not go into detailed explanations to 
demonstrate that a serious study of Jewish scholarship requires 
familiarity with many areas of general human knowledge. Anyone even 
superficially acquainted with, say, Rabbinic literature knows about 
the significance of mathematics and astronomy, botany and zoology, 
anatomy and medicine, jurisprudence and ethics in the deliberations 
of our Sages. He will therefore not underestimate the extent to which 
disciples of Talmudic learning can benefit from familiarity with 
these fields of general knowledge.

Now if the Judaism for which we are educating our young need not 
shrink from contact with the intellectual elements of any other true 
culture, it is essential for the future of our youth as citizens, and 
therefore it is a true religious duty, for us to give them a secular 
education. A secular education is a most beneficial help to our young 
in understanding the times in which they live and the conditions 
under which they will have to practice their life's vocation; hence 
it is most desirable also from the Jewish religious viewpoint and 
consequently deserving of warm support. But at the same time, and 
even more important, a good secular education can give our young 
people substantial new insights, added dimensions that will enrich 
their religious training. For this reason, too, secular education 
deserves the support of the religious educator.

But it seems to us that no thinking Jew, aware of his mission as a 
Jew, should deny that, quite aside from considerations of vocational 
and professional education, it is also essential that young Jews, 
particularly those of our own times, should learn about the factors 
that influence the life of modern nations; in other words, that they 
should be introduced to those branches of study that will enable them 
to acquire this knowledge.

----------
The following is from the Introduction to the Hebrew translation of 
Euclid's book on geometry, Sefer Uklidos [The Hague, 1780] by R. 
Barukh Schick of Shklov.

When I was in the illustrious city of Vilna in the presence of the 
Rav, the light, the great Gaon, my master and teacher, the light of 
the eyes of the exile, the renowned pious one (may Hashem protect and 
save him) Rav Eliyahu, in the month of Teves 5538 [January 1778], I 
heard from his holy mouth that according to what a person is lacking 
in knowledge of the "other wisdoms," correspondingly he will be 
lacking one hundred portions in the wisdom of the Torah, because the 
Torah and the 'other wisdoms' are inextricably linked together ..."

The following is from pages 148-149 of  Judaism's Encounter with 
Other Cultures: Rejection or Integration?

R. Israel of Shklov (d. 1839) wrote:

I cannot refrain from repeating a true and astonishing story that I 
heard from the Gaon's disciple R. Menahem Mendel.  It took place when 
the Gaon of Vilna celebrated the completion of his commentary on Song 
of Songs. . . . He raised his eyes toward heaven and with great 
devotion began blessing and thanking God for endowing him with the 
ability to comprehend the light of the entire Torah. This included 
its inner and outer manifestations. He explained: All secular wisdom 
is essential for our holy Torah and is included in it. He indicated 
that he had mastered all the branches of secular wisdom, including 
algebra, trigonometry, geometry, and music. He especially praised 
music, explaining that most of the Torah accents, the secrets of the 
Levitical songs, and  the secrets of the Tikkunei Zohar could not be 
comprehended without mastering it. . .  He explained the significance 
of the various secular disciplines, and noted that  he had mastered 
them all. Regarding the discipline of medicine, he stated that he 
had  mastered anatomy, but not pharmacology. Indeed, he had wanted to 
study pharmacology with practicing physicians, but his father 
prevented him from undertaking its study,  fearing that upon 
mastering it he would be forced to curtail his Torah study whenever 
it would become necessary for him to save a life. . . . He also 
stated that he had  mastered all of philosophy, but that he had 
derived only two matters of significance from  his study of it. . . . 
The rest of it, he said, should be discarded." [11]

[11.] Pe'at ha-Shulhan, ed. Abraham M. Luncz (Jerusalem, 1911), 5a.

Thus it would seem that according to the GRA  all secular knowledge 
has the "ability to enhance one's knowledge of and dedication to a 
Torah life" save for almost all of philosophy.  YL
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110705/197f6683/attachment-0001.htm>

RSP:

<<Could it be that kol being yafeh for besamim and not for winemaking 
has something to do with the different nature of the tasks involved>>

See Toras HaOlah 2:36.

David Riceman

On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 12:43:52PM +0200, Arie Folger wrote:
: On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 12:30 PM, Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org> wrote:
: > It seems clear to me that in all three contexts the one-in-a-minyan who
: > knows how to daven is being compared to the shoshanah.
: 
: Context, context, context .. and larger context.

Really, I should have said "cases". I didn't bring in a wider context.

The medrash says "Lemah hu domeh beineihem? Keshoshanah bein
hachochim." I'm repeating that -- the mevareikh is the shoshanah, the
masses who lack the art of blessing and prayer are the chochim. Unlike
the other comments on this pasuq which make kelal Yisrael the shoshanah
bein umos ha'olam.

How can context turn the befeirush words of the medrash into something
else? I would faster say that R' Chanan deTzipori was simply not trying
to fit the words of the other tannaim. (Since the thoughts are't mutually
exclusive, I won't say "he is choleiq on".)

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             You cannot propel yourself forward
mi...@aishdas.org        by patting yourself on the back.
http://www.aishdas.org                   -Anonymous
Fax: (270) 514-1507

On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 08:23:46AM -0700, Harvey Benton wrote:
: why the difference in loshon ( go to peace) when escorting someone away, versus 
: an angel, whom we say in lecha dodi, come "in" peace??

See Berakhos 64a, R' Avin haLevi. Yisro wished Moshe "Leikh leShalom",
and Moshe succeeded. David wished Avshalom "Leikh Beshalom", and he
was killed. We deduce that the "shalom" of "leikh beshalom" is implicitly
the peace of the grave.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             When faced with a decision ask yourself,
mi...@aishdas.org        "How would I decide if it were Ne'ilah now,
http://www.aishdas.org   at the closing moments of Yom Kippur?"
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            - Rav Yisrael Salanter

Thank you for providing the actual text, I never actually had a chance to
read RSRH on the subject inside.
The question I'm asking really is, is the "MO" position that "science and
culture" are important in and of themselves, or like RSRH and the GR"A,
important only insofar as they help to improve ones "religious" and Torah
observance?
Like I said, even if the end result is the same, if it is arrived at from a
completely different side, you can't really put the credit/blame on R
Hirsch.
 On Jul 5, 2011 8:29 AM, "Prof. Levine" <llev...@stevens.edu> wrote:
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110705/a7ac7304/attachment-0001.htm>

At 09:50 AM 7/5/2011, Yitz . wrote:
>The question I'm asking really is, is the "MO" position that 
>"science and culture" are important in and of themselves, or like 
>RSRH and the GR"A, important only insofar as they help to improve 
>ones "religious" and Torah observance?
>Like I said, even if the end result is the same, if it is arrived at 
>from a completely different side, you can't really put the 
>credit/blame on R Hirsch.

There is a difference between what you call the MO position and what 
I understand to be the positions of RSRH and the GRA.

You might want to have a look at what Dr. Yehudah (Leo) Levi writes 
in his book Torah Study, A Survey of Classic Sources on Timely 
Issues. You can look at selections from this book by searching in google books.

Part 7 is titled Secular Studies: The Torah View.   Chapter 2 of this 
section is titled The Study of the Natural Sciences: The 
Obligation.  Chapter 4 is titled The Study of the Humanities.  It 
begins with the statement, "As shown in Chapter 1, the Sages and 
later authorities, in general, decried the study of any alien wisdom, 
except for science."  One section deals with Reasons for the Prohibitions.

I think that many MO would see no reason not to study almost any 
secular humanities subject, whereas the GRA and RSRH would not 
agree.  This is a real difference and "the end result is" *not* the same.

Yitzchok Levine 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110705/694090ac/attachment-0001.htm>

why the difference in loshon ( go to peace) when escorting someone away, versus 
an angel, whom we say in lecha dodi, come "in" peace??
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110705/806e58b1/attachment-0001.htm>

did yaakov have the best of intentions when he 1. bought the bechor rights from 
his brother eisav (eg, helping to save his life)
and 2. when he listened to his mother
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110705/d7ae5404/attachment-0001.htm>

 From http://torahmusings.com/2011/07/shabbat-mincha-no-ties/

While the sources cited above are somewhat dubious, unclear, and 
should not be followed halacha l'maaseh, I just may have found some 
kind of source or limud zechut for the widespread subconscious North 
American "minhag" of not wearing a tie (and other dress-down 
practices) when going to the synagogue for mincha on Shabbat afternoons.

See the above URL for the entire article. YL
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110705/19f5c11f/attachment-0001.htm>

In response to the comment,

> Those are just the fool-making stories he's talking about!<,

RZSero wrote

> Since when?  What source do you have for that?  Clearly he's talking
about the stories that nobody can possibly believe literally happened,
such as those of Rabba bar Bar Chana.<

To which RMBerger replied

>Look at the Rambam's words. He says that divrei chakhamim are melitzah,
and intepreting them literally is wrong. That part doesn't require
disbelieving that they aren't also potentially historical -- just that
there is no actual historical claim being made. Chazal do not repeat
a story any more because it's history than if it weren't. But then he
talks about people who "...vena'asu etzlam kol hanimna'os mechuyevei
hamtzei'us." The Rambam rules out such stories that defy nature.<

     When the Rambam criticizes those for whom "na'asu etzlam kol
     hanimna'os mechuyavei ham'tzius," he does _not_ rule out all incidents
     which go against nature.  He criticizes them for believing "she_kol_
     hanimna'os" -- _all_ "impossible" incidents --  must be true.  This is
     not the same as saying all are not true.  Certainly he held neis
     Chanuka to be literal.  Why should "chometz v'yadlik" be any more
     unbelievable?  Furthermore, the g'mara derives a halacha from the
     incident of R. Pinchas b. Yair's donkey, stating that we must
     interpret an act of R. Meir's as proving something muttar for eating,
     because it certainly couldn't have been an oversight on his part: if
     even a tzaddik's animal is prevented by Hashem from eating b'issur,
     kal vachomer for a tzaddik himself.  It's difficult to see how the kal
     vachomer works if the story is only a m'litza.

EMT 

  r

____________________________________________________________
Penny Stock Soaring 3000%
Sign up for Free to find out what the next 3000% Stock Winner is!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4e133bd53a50620fe03st04vuc


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 28, Issue 125
***************************************

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..."