Avodah Mailing List

Volume 28: Number 132

Tue, 12 Jul 2011

• 1. Women and Tefillin (Hankman)
• 2. Re: Women and tefillin (Elazar M. Teitz)
• 3. Re: Women and tefillin (Micha Berger)
• 4. minhagim of a chupa (Eli Turkel)
• 5. Re: Women and tefillin (menucha)
• 6. Reincarnation (was Women and Tefillin) (Prof. Levine)
• 7. Rav Menashe Klein ? Wearing Tefilin On A Toupee (Prof. Levine)
• 8. Women and Tefillin (Prof. Levine)
• 9. ben ploni le--- (Saul.Z.New...@kp.org)
• 10. on chnaged chazakas (Saul.Z.New...@kp.org)
• 11. soup (David Riceman)
• 12. Halachically Speaking on Select Modesty Issues (Prof. Levine)
• 13. Re: Rav Menashe Klein – Wearing Tefilin On A Toupee (Rafi Hecht)
• 14. Re: Women and Tefillin (Moshe Y. Gluck)
• 15. polygamy (Micha Berger)
• 16. Tell the Person Collecting "Daddy Is Not Available" (Prof. Levine)

RRW wrote:
Of course, women can't pick and choose. If they decide to m'kayem the
mitzvos she-ha-z'man g'rama, they must fulfill all of them (perhaps with
some necessary exceptions).


CM responds:

I do not see what is so "Of course" about it. Do you have any source for 
your assertion other than your personal opinion? Without a source to the 
contrary, I see no reason why a woman would not be able to pick and choose a 
personal menu of (suitable) mitzvot to observe she would otherwise be patur 
from without the requirement that she do them all.

Kol tuv

Chaim Manaster 

     The comment was made

>Of course, women can't pick and choose. If they decide to m'kayem the
mitzvos she-ha-z'man g'rama, they must fulfill all of them (perhaps with
some necessary exceptions). <

     Indeed? Many women fulfill the mitzva of arba'a minim.  How many of them fulfill the mitzvos of tzitzis and t'fillin?

EMT

____________________________________________________________
Penny Stock Jumping 3000%
Sign up to the #1 voted penny stock newsletter for free today!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4e1a91e881bee2fc767st03vuc

On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 06:01:30AM +0000, Elazar M. Teitz wrote:
: Indeed? Many women fulfill the mitzva of arba'a minim. How many of
: them fulfill the mitzvos of tzitzis and t'fillin?

In both of REMT's cases, there is actually strong reason for a woman
/not/ to fulfill those particular mitzvos:

Tzitzis are clothing, and once it wasn't in style for women to wear
tzitzis, for them to do so would violate "beged ish" ("Lo yihyeh keli
gever al ishah..." Dev 22:5)

At some point during the period of the tannaim (I think during the
Tosafists' era in particular), the time men wear tefillin was strictly
curtailed. Related to our recent discussion of how much kavanah our
rabbis think we are capable of today. Until then, men with desk jobs or
who learned all day were wearing tefillin all day as well. Since we lack
the necessary yishuv hadaas to think about tefillin for that many hours,
we now curtail our tefillin-wearing to the minimum necessary so that we
may say Shema without looking like a pack of liars.

For men, the minimum is during Shema, and we stretch that to the rest
of Shacharis. For women, the minimum is zero.

Thus, it is possible that Rashi's daughters really did wear tefillin, but
that still wouldn't reflect on what should be done today. Rashi himself
wore tefillin all day; this intellectual decay that made us unable to
have proper kavanah to wear tefillin all day hadn't reached us yet.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             "The worst thing that can happen to a
mi...@aishdas.org        person is to remain asleep and untamed."
http://www.aishdas.org          - Rabbi Simcha Zissel Ziv, Alter of Kelm
Fax: (270) 514-1507

<<On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 09:20:57AM +0300, Eli Turkel wrote:
: Which leads to my question: Do we say "lo plug" on minhagim especially
: those that seems to have arisen by themselves.

Are there any other kind?
If the minhag didn't arise on its own, wouldn't it be a taqanah? >>

The connection between minhag and takkanah is not always clear.
Many takkanot started out as minhagim. The various laws of nidah and
zava are quoted as
"bnot yisrael hechimiru al atzman" yet today no one would call it a minhag.

Among minhagim there are some that started among the people and some
that were started by some Gadol.
So if it started by some rabbis without being a formal takkanah I
could see a possibility of "lo plug"
IMHO if it started among the people it is less clear that "lo plug" applied.
I suggested as a possibility that this might be the argument among
poskim concerning kitniyot whose origins are very murky.

BTW a question I have asked many without a real answer (I may have
asked it on list) is when do we apply "lo plug" and when not.
I have not found any consistent pattern. One famous case is lighting
candles on yom tov evening in which the mother of the Sma made the
bracha and then lit while MA says "lo plug" from shabbat.



-- 
Eli Turkel

The Targum Yonatan also puts tfillin into "kli gever"
menucha

Micha Berger wrote:

>On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 06:01:30AM +0000, Elazar M. Teitz wrote:
>: Indeed? Many women fulfill the mitzva of arba'a minim. How many of
>: them fulfill the mitzvos of tzitzis and t'fillin?
>
>In both of REMT's cases, there is actually strong reason for a woman
>/not/ to fulfill those particular mitzvos:
>
>Tzitzis are clothing, and once it wasn't in style for women to wear
>tzitzis, for them to do so would violate "beged ish" ("Lo yihyeh keli
>gever al ishah..." Dev 22:5)
>  
>

At 10:10 PM 7/10/2011, Cantor Richard Wolberg wrote:

>[What I find fascinating is the idea of Reincarnation being endorsed by
>some Sages while being denounced by others). I recall a shiur in where
>the Rebbe believed in Reincarnation and said that you can only come
>back as a Jew. When I was a teenager I learned with a Rabbi Katz z"l
>in Hartford, Ct. He said that if you don't wash prior to making the motzi,
>you will come back as a dog (transmigration of the souls). That's pretty
>scary, unless, of course, you come back as Lassie]. Personally, I feel
>that gilgul hanefesh is plausible. (Interestingly, the Greek philosophical
>term for transmigration of the soul is "Metempsychosis." What I find
>intriguing is the implementation of the word 'Psychosis' which is a
>pathological psychiatric condition involving a loss of contact with reality).

R. Saadia Goan (882-942) in his Beliefs and Opinions (Emunos VeDeyos)  writes,

"Yet I must say that I have found certain people, who call themselves 
Jews, professing the doctrine of metempsychosis, which is designated 
by them as the theory of the "transmigration" of  souls. What they 
mean thereby is that the spirit of Reuben is transferred to Shimon 
and afterwards to Levi and after that to Judah. Many of them would 
even go so far as to assert that the spirit of a human being might 
enter into the body of a beast or that of a beast into the body of a 
human being, and other such nonsense and stupidities." (Treatise VI , 
Chapter VIII)

Others who followed R. Saadia Goan and did not subscribe to the 
doctrine of gilgul are R.Chisdai Crecas ( c.1310-c.1415) and R. 
Joseph Albo (c.1380-1444).

Rabbi Avigdor Miller would not talk about reincarnation, since it is 
not mentioned even once in the entire Talmud Bavli. Personally, I do 
not think that he believed in gilgul, but he never said this to me explicitly.



Yitzchok Levine 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110711/081c04de/attachment-0001.htm>

 From http://revach.net/article.php?id=2654

If someone wears a toupee, must he take it off when putting on 
Tefilin Shel Rosh? The Tshuvas HaRashba (1:30), which is not in 
accordance with the other Rishonim, proves from the Yerushalmi that 
having a Chatzitza, a separation between your head and your Tefilin 
Shel Rosh, is not a problem.  It is only a problem by Tefilin Shel 
Yad.  However, says Rav Menashe Klein (Mishneh Halachos 6:8), that at 
best the Rashba only holds this B'Di'eved and even so he concedes 
that the Rishonim before him disagreed.  Furthermore, the Rashba says 
that his opinion is L'Halacha but not L'Maaseh.

Another possible heter says the Mishneh Halachos is a Pnei Aryeh (6) 
who says that if you put white powder in your hair, it is not a 
Chatzitza since it is for beauty, and anything put in the hair for 
aesthetic purposes in not a chatzitza.  Similarly, says Rav Menashe 
Klein, maybe a toupee, which is meant to enhance your appearance, is 
also not a chatzitza.  However he dismisses this argument saying that 
you cannot compare powder, which disappears and a toupee, which is very thick.

L'Maskana he says that the Shela HaKadosh holds that even if you put 
ashes in your hair for aveilus Zecher L'Churban, you must wash it off 
before putting on your tefilin.  The Machatzis HaShekel (OC 27:4) 
says that even excessively long hair is a Chatzitza.  Although some 
disagree with this Machazis HaShekel, says Rav Menashe Klein, 
certainly when it comes to a toupee, all would agree that it is a 
chatzitza.  If after explaining to someone the problem with a toupee 
for Tefilin the person insists on putting Tefilin on top of a toupee, 
he definitely shouldn't make a separate bracha on his tefilin shel rosh.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110711/c38154ac/attachment-0001.htm>

Given what I recently posted about wearing tefillin on a toupee that 
is at http://revach.net/article.php?id=2654 , I cannot resist asking, 
"Can a woman wearing a sheitel put teffilin on?"  YL

is that medrash literal?
if so , there must be exceptions , right?  like when either the boy or 
girl will either not survive nor  ever marry...


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110711/bb6c7f65/attachment-0001.htm>

http://www.rationalistjudaism.com/2011/07/rav-and-immutability-
of-halachah.html 



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110711/c4367821/attachment-0001.htm>

RAM:

<<(1) I propose that <<< soup (especially clear soup) >>> is a "liptan" 
- the prime example of a food which is eaten together with bread so very 
frequently that the bread will exempt it even when eaten separately from 
the bread. Consider: croutons, mandlen, matza farfel, bits of challah. 
All these items are routinely eaten with soup; boxes are even labeled by 
the manufacturer as "soup croutons" and "soup mandlen". It may be 
noteworthy that while these items can be added to any soup, they are 
most often added to *clear* soups!>>

On the contrary, I would have thought that these would be tafel to the 
soup (see siman 212) were it not for the special rule that when 
something is made of the 5 minim mixed with other things, the dagan is 
always considered ikkar (see the first Biur Halacha in the siman).   No 
one, if you cut him a slice of bread, asks for soup to go with it, but, 
if you give someone some soup, he might ask for bread to go with it.  
Liftan is something you use to accompany bread, not something you use 
bread to accompany.

<<Perhaps Hamotzi covers soup because soup is an appetizer?>>

But why is soup different from fruit? Over Shabbos I looked at Hayyei 
Adam Klal 43, and I was intrigued to find that EVERY example he gave of 
something that's not part of the meal is fruit.  The impression I came 
away with is that he, like you, really wanted to say that everything you 
eat during a meal is part of a meal, but he was stuck because of 
precedent, so rather than redefining his concept of a meal he simply 
decided that fruit is a unique case.

David Riceman
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110711/f8b4a1d3/attachment-0001.htm>

Volume 7, Issue 7 dealing with Select Modesty Issues is available at
<http://cts.vresp.com/c
/?HalachicallySpeaking/e575e37b79/25eaba7ad5/5d7aca7a32/utm_content=larry62
341%40optonline.net&;utm_source=VerticalResponse&utm_medium=Emai
l&utm_term=Click%20here%20to%20download%20Volume%207%20Issue%207%20-%20
Summer%20Halachos%20-%20Select%20Modesty%20Issues%2E&utm_campaign=Volum
e%207%20Issue%20%207%20-%20Summer%20Halachos%20-%20Select%20Modesty%20Issue
s>
here to download Volume 7 Issue 7 - Summer Halachos - Select Modesty Issues.
[Or <http://bit.ly/rmsWVN> -micha]

Here are some selections from this publication. I am not including the
footnotes. One may read them in the actual document.

Saying Shalom and other Expressions to a Woman

In the summer many people go away to bungalow colonies or summer homes,
where there are often women present. As will be explained in detail
below one area in which one must be careful is using words which are
not allowed to be said to a woman.

One is not allowed to say "Shalom" to a woman.45 The reason is because
Shalom is a name of Hashem which by saying it brings closeness to
people, and chazal made a geder46 which obligates one to avoid any type
of conduct that represents chibah (love).47 This would not apply to
saying this to young girls,48 or to ones close family relatives (sister,
mother, etc).49 Asking about a woman's welfare is likewise forbidden.
Therefore one should not say "how are you." One is permitted to inquire
about a woman through her husband.50 Others say doing so is permitted
through any third party.51

Some poskim say even if one is only saying "Shalom" out of niceness,
since that is how people speak, it should still be avoided.52 A woman
may not say "Shalom" to a man either.53

The Ben Yehoyada54 maintains that this halacha only applies to a woman
one does not know, and one would be permitted to say Shalom to someone
he knows since it is being done to show derech eretz not to bring
closeness. Based on this, some say that where one does not recognize
the woman, such as on the telephone, saying Shalom is permitted.55
Nonetheless, one must be careful not to use his words too leniently.
Although, some poskim say that telling a woman something is permitted if
one does not use the word Shalom,56 this is not a simple matter to permit.

One is permitted to shake his head at a woman to acknowledge her presence.

Mazel Tov/ Davening etc.

It is important to mention that one is permitted to wish mazel tov58 to a
woman at a simcha since it is a Tefillah and is not intended for chibah,
chazal did not include it in the issur.59 It is also permitted to daven
for a woman.60 Wishing a woman a good year is permitted.61 Wishing a
woman health or a get well soon is also permitted.62 One is permitted
to consol a woman mourner.63

"Good Shabbos/Morning/Evening, Hi or Hello"

The poskim write that saying good Shabbos,64 good morning, or good
evening to a woman does not fall into the above issur.65 Although others
say that doing so is not permitted,66 the custom is to permit these
expressions. One should avoid saying "hi" to a woman because it is an
expression which is only used by intimate friends.67 However, saying
"hello" would be permitted.68

Other Expressions

One is not allowed to ask a woman: How did you spend your Shabbos? Or
what are your vacation plans?69 Some say one who is walking in the
street and meets a woman he knows may ask about her family's welfare
since doing so is a nice gesture.



Let me remind everyone that just because I send something out does not
mean that I subscribe to it entirely or even in part. YL

On Jul 11, 2011, at 7:23 AM, "Prof. Levine" <llev...@stevens.edu> wrote:
> From http://revach.net/article.php?id=2654
...
> Another possible heter says the Mishneh Halachos is a Pnei Aryeh (6) who
> says that if you put white powder in your hair, it is not a Chatzitza
> since it is for beauty, and anything put in the hair for aesthetic
> purposes in not a chatzitza. Similarly, says Rav Menashe Klein, maybe
> a toupee, which is meant to enhance your appearance, is also not a
> chatzitza. However he dismisses this argument saying that you cannot
> compare powder, which disappears and a toupee, which is very thick.

> L'Maskana he says that the Shela HaKadosh holds that even if you put
> ashes in your hair for aveilus Zecher L'Churban, you must wash it off
> before putting on your tefilin. The Machatzis HaShekel (OC 27:4) says
> that even excessively long hair is a Chatzitza. Although some disagree...
> with this Machazis HaShekel, says Rav Menashe Klein, certainly when
> it comes to a toupee, all would agree that it is a chatzitza...
...

It's a difficulty as for some, it's not only for aesthetic purposes,
but it's embarrassing if seen without it!

- Rafi Hecht

RRW wrote:
Of course, women can't pick and choose. If they decide to m'kayem the
mitzvos she-ha-z'man g'rama, they must fulfill all of them (perhaps with
some necessary exceptions).
---------------


Arba Minim, and other mitzvos, and that does not obligate them in the
others.

KT,
MYG

I suggested that the RBSO timed cheirem deR' Gershom on polygamy to
end right before the Shoah caused a number of men to accidentally take
2nd wives because they wrongly thought their first wives had perished.

On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 06:10:46PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote on Areivim:
> Where did you get that from?  The Shulchan Aruch says it expired at
> the end of the fifth millennium.

There are two opinions, that it ran for the rest of the millenium (as
you cited the SA) or that it ran for /a/ millenium (e.g. the LR's sichah
of 3 Iyar 5747, parsashas Tazria-Metzorah mentions both 300 years and
1000 years).

But in any case, as I saw in the sichah, I was a century off when I
the 2nd opinion would have his cheirem run out shortly before WWII.
The LR mentions a millenium, and wikipedia tells me RGMH was niftar
in 1040, not 940.

BTW, our current lack of polygamy may be based on the fact that no one
closer in time to RGMH mentions this millenial time limit, and therefore
there are grounds to doubt it is real. (IOW, that we hold like a third
opinion.)

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Despair is the worst of ailments. No worries
mi...@aishdas.org        are justified except: "Why am I so worried?"
http://www.aishdas.org                         - Rav Yisrael Salanter
Fax: (270) 514-1507

From  http://revach.net/article.php?id=720   (Note the last two sentences.) YL

Shevet HeKehosi: Tell the Person Collecting "Daddy Is Not Available"

If someone knocks on the door collecting tzedoka and a child answers 
when his father is sleeping should he wake up his father or not? The 
Shevet HaKehosi (5:176) says no. Although the Sefer Chasidim says you 
should wake up your father for a mitzva since it will make him happy, 
nevertheless tzedoka is different.

Firstly unless the son knows for a fact that his father has enough 
money to support his family, he may not even be obligated to give 
tzedoka according to some acharonim. Even according to those who say 
he is still obligated, they agree that there is no mitzva to give 
this particular collector. Additionally the son cannot be sure that 
this collector is worthy. He may be a crook which is all too common 
nowadays, according to the Shevet HaKehosi. Therefore it is better to 
ask the collector to come back later unless the father specifically 
asks to be woken up.

Interestingly the Sefer Chasidim says that Dama Ben Nesina did not 
wake his father up to get the keys to sell the jewel to the Chachomim 
because the profit was his alone. If his father would have profited 
from the sale it would have been permissible to wake his father up.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20110712/89e2dfd3/attachment.htm>

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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 28, Issue 132
***************************************

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..."