Avodah Mailing List

Volume 29: Number 31

Wed, 29 Feb 2012

• 1. Re: Evolution (Ilana Elzufon)
• 2. evolution (Eli Turkel)
• 3. Re: [Areivim] chareidi soldiers in zahal (Liron Kopinsky)
• 4. Re: Association of Positive Mitzvot with Days of Year? (Zev Sero)
• 5. Re: Association of Positive Mitzvot with Days of Year? (Micha Berger)
• 6. Re: Association of Positive Mitzvot with Days of Year? (Micha Berger)
• 7. The Stars and the Heavenly Orbits Enjoy Pleasure (Prof. Levine)
• 8. superbowl maaariv (Eli Turkel)
• 9. Re: The SuperBowl Maariv (Andy Levy-Stevenson)
• 10. Re: The Superbowl Maariv (Zev Sero)
• 11. Re: The Superbowl Maariv (Micha Berger)
• 12. Re: Evolution (T6...@aol.com)
• 13. Re: Association of Positive Mitzvot with Days of Year? (Zev Sero)
• 14. Re: Association of Positive Mitzvot with Days of Year? (Micha Berger)

There is certainly much that suggests, both on the physiological/anatomical
and the biochemical level, and based on patterns of geographic
distribution, that various species are "related" to each other in a sort of
family tree. AFAIK, this is is the basis of modern taxonomy.

It is quite reasonable to posit that G-d created them this way from the
beginning.

It is also quite reasonable to posit that this is the effect of evolution.
However, the mechanisms of evolution operate so slowly that they cannot be
observed by human beings. I think those seeking to understand these
mechanisms have moved far beyond the simple random mutations plus natural
selection formula that many of us learned in school, and that evolutionary
theory will ultimately be based on aspects of genetics, epigenetics,
developmental biology, and who knows what else, that are still in the
process of being discovered. Or haven't yet been discovered.

I don't think one can "disprove" the theory of special creation of
individual species - after all, G-d can do whatever he wants. I also don't
think one can "disprove" the theory of evolution based on the inadequacy of
the current understanding of its mechanisms. I would imagine that
evolutionary biologists have the humility to acknowledge (and the ambition
to hope) that there is still much to be discovered in this field.

- Ilana
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120229/a6310738/attachment-0001.htm>

<< That said, I can't call evolution "fact". It has strong evidence, but
nothing
really rules out RMMS's or R' Avigdor Miller's supposition that Hashem had
His
own reasons for laying down that evidence. >>

According to Rabbi Miller there is nothing as science. All modern science
is based on experiment and observations, it is never proved in the
mathematical sense of the word. Hence, the fact that a ball always falls to
earth every time doesnt "prove" that gravity exists. Perhaps as others
claim every time G-d causes the ball to fall but there is no such natural
fact as gravity. Perhaps the world was created a week ago and all archives
of areivim and avodah were planted there by G-d for his reasons.

Evolution in the local sense occurs all the time. It is well known that
viruses evolve to counteract anti-virus drugs and so old drugs like
penicillin are no longer used.

In fact the CI believed in evolution in much stronger sense than any
scientists. He believed that the human body changed physically from the
days of chazal in order to answer contradictions between chazal and modern
day science. Science talks about species evolution over millions of years
while CI claims the human body changed over 2000 years.
-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120229/df4e2c4a/attachment-0001.htm>

Not sure if this is for Avodah or Areivim, so I'm sending it to both.

From Areivim:
"Yesterday on Galei Tzahal, a soldier who served in the Nachal Chareidi
spoke about his service. He mentioned three incidents in which he and
his buddies needed to call a rav. 1) They were to protect some citizens
on Shabbat who were doing some Chillul Shabbat (they were told that they
would be doing this on Friday). 2) They were searching for a terrorist
in the Beqqa on Tisha B'av and the officer, after several hours in the
field, ordered them to drink 3) They had to get on a helicopter to
pursue a terrorist and upon getting in they saw that the pilot was a woman.

In the first they consulted with Rav Elyashiv who told them to refuse.
>
Presumably there are other, non-frum soldiers, who would have been able to
take over the watch, and R' Elyashiv felt it was important to not actively
enable Chillul Shabbos. There is a big difference between protecting people
who are mechallel shabbos and actually providing those people with the
ability to do so.


> In the second they consulted with some rav who told them that it was OK to
> drink
>
I'm surprised this is even a shaila at all. Why weren't they drinking all
day? It would make sense to me that soldiers doing active operations would
be required to drink and eat. I would even be unsurprised if soldiers who
were "on-call" and not in the middle of actual operations were allowed to
eat and drink.


> and in the third the officer forced them to get on board and didn't give
> them a chance to call."
>
I echo RJK's request for someone who actually served to pipe in here, as
I'm confused. On the one hand, the army seems to have failed their
obligations to these soldiers by not providing them a male pilot. This is
an issue which needs to be taken up with the army after the fact. But if
you are actively chasing a terrorist, and every second is precious, why
would there even be a question as to whether you should ask a shaila at the
moment?


> RJK wrote:
>
I am sure that all of the armchair soldiers sitting comfortably thousands
> of miles away have opinions about the issues raised by this.  But what I'm
> interested in is the opinions of those on this list who have served, or are
> still serving,  in the IDF.  Help me out, please.
>

-- 
Liron Kopinsky
liron.kopin...@gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120229/8c4ffab5/attachment-0001.htm>

The ketores was 368 manim (a measure of weight), not kabim (a measure
of volume).  I suppose it's possible that a kav of the mixture weighed
a maneh, so they were equivalent, but where do you see that?  It seems
unlikely; 3 kabim is rather a lot, far more than would be necessary for
even a kohen gadol with the largest possible hand.


> So it would seem the amount the workers take away from the running
> total is measurable.

I'm not sure what you mean by this.  Surely they didn't keep anything;
whatever they took on the 29th of Adar in lieu of wages, they sold back
on the 1st of Nissan, so this had no net effect on the accumulated size
of the mixture.  Every year they would weigh out 368 manim and add it
to whatever was carried over from last year, and every year the amount
they had to carry over was 3 manim minus a handful more than last year,
the exact amount depending on the size of that year's kohen gadol's hand.

It would seem that the average KG's handful was something like 1/3 of a
maneh, so the question I implied above still stands: why provide 3 manim
for this purpose?  My only guess is that once in a while there was a KG
with giant hands; if Moshe Rabbenu was 10 amos tall, as the gemara says
(and it seems impossible to read that allegorically), then presumably
his hands were also very big, and he may have needed 3 manim in order to
reach in and take a handful.

-- 
Zev Sero        "Natural resources are not finite in any meaningful
z...@sero.name    economic sense, mind-boggling though this assertion
                  may be. The stocks of them are not fixed but rather
                 are expanding through human ingenuity."
                                            - Julian Simon

On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 04:39:42PM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
> I'm not sure what you mean by this.  Surely they didn't keep anything;
> whatever they took on the 29th of Adar in lieu of wages, they sold back
> on the 1st of Nissan, so this had no net effect on the accumulated size
> of the mixture....

I already pointed you to the gemara in Sheqalim which says otherwise.

A person from Beis Avtimas could be maqdish the qetores back to
the beis hamiqdash for service. Thus, they DID take it home. See
Sheqalim 11b in the Bavli edition.

...
> It would seem that the average KG's handful was something like 1/3 of a
> maneh, so the question I implied above still stands: why provide 3 manim
> for this purpose?  My only guess is that once in a while there was a KG
> with giant hands; if Moshe Rabbenu was 10 amos tall...

I figured it had to do with the grinding. YK qetores was ground finer,
and probably wouldn't come out as well if that grinding was in too
small of a batch. For reasons similar to "shehakol yafeh labesamim",
I would think it quite possible that the quality improved if more of
the perfume was in the air.

-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             "'When Adar enters, we increase our joy'
mi...@aishdas.org         'Joy is nothing but Torah.'
http://www.aishdas.org    'And whoever does more, he is praiseworthy.'"
Fax: (270) 514-1507                     - Rav Dovid Lifshitz zt"l

On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 04:39:42PM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
> I'm not sure what you mean by this.  Surely they didn't keep anything;
> whatever they took on the 29th of Adar in lieu of wages, they sold back
> on the 1st of Nissan, so this had no net effect on the accumulated size
> of the mixture....

I already pointed you to the gemara in Sheqalim which says otherwise.

A person from Beis Avtimas could be maqdish the qetores back to
the beis hamiqdash for service. Thus, they DID take it home. See
Sheqalim 11b in the Bavli edition.

...
> It would seem that the average KG's handful was something like 1/3 of a
> maneh, so the question I implied above still stands: why provide 3 manim
> for this purpose?  My only guess is that once in a while there was a KG
> with giant hands; if Moshe Rabbenu was 10 amos tall...

I figured it had to do with the grinding. YK qetores was ground finer,
and probably wouldn't come out as well if that grinding was in too
small of a batch. For reasons similar to "shehakol yafeh labesamim",
I would think it quite possible that the quality improved if more of
the perfume was in the air.

-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             "'When Adar enters, we increase our joy'
mi...@aishdas.org         'Joy is nothing but Torah.'
http://www.aishdas.org    'And whoever does more, he is praiseworthy.'"
Fax: (270) 514-1507                     - Rav Dovid Lifshitz zt"l

The following if from the RAMBAM's Introduction to Chelek page 165 
that is contained in Maimonides Pirkei Avot translated by Rabbi 
Eliyahu Touger that was published by Moznaim Publishing Company in 1994,

Nevertheless, it would be improper for the masters of the Torah and 
the metaphysical philosophers to say that [spiritual entities,] the 
angels, the stars and the heavenly orbits29 do not enjoy pleasure. 
Instead, they do enjoy great pleasure, stemming from their 
comprehension of the Creator, blessed be He. This generates constant 
and uninterrupted pleasure for them. They have no sense of physical 
pleasure and cannot conceive of it, for they do not have [physical] 
senses to enable them to perceive what we perceive.

29. The Rambam is following the conception, reaffirmed in Hi/chat 
Yesodei HaTorah 3:9, that the heavenly bodies are not merely inert 
objects, but rather conscious beings, each containing a soul that 
appreciates Godliness in a manner that surpasses the comprehension of humans.


----------
I have to admit that I was unaware until I read this that the RAMBAM 
held that the heavenly bodies are conscious beings.

Can anyone enlighten me regarding what is the basis for his holding 
this belief?   YL
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120229/bbf2b8ab/attachment-0001.htm>

> Here's another situation which might be (pardon the pun) in the same
> ballpark: Allowing a combined Mincha-Maariv minyan in the same post-Plag
> and pre-Night block of time, which ought to be avoided, but is allowed
> simply to maximize minyan attendance. Basically it comes down to balancing
> the convenience and desires of the attendees, against the goals and ideals
> of Torah, does it not?

In my experience this is a difference between EY and outside EY. In EY
we wait some 20-25 minutes between mincha before shkia and maariv after
shkia. In the US all the shuls I went to had a 2 minute break between
mincha and maariv.

Is convenience more importance outside of Israel?

>> Actually, he quotes his father as saying that the sunset of ne'ilah is
>> prettier than others.

> How would he know?  Which Jew has ever seen it?

He meant that the sunset of YK is more important because it is mechaper
not prettier in the physical sense

-- 
Eli Turkel

Apologies if this point was already made, and I missed it:

One explanation for the timing of Maariv to fall specifically during the
half-time break is that it encourages the attendees to avoid watching the
half-time show.

Since this show is often less modest than we might prefer, this would seem
to be a good thing, no?

--
Andy Levy-Stevenson
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120229/b50863f1/attachment-0001.htm>

On 29/02/2012 9:19 AM, cantorwolb...@cox.net wrote:
>> Actually, he quotes his father as saying that the sunset of ne'ilah is
>> prettier than others.
>
> How would he know?  Which Jew has ever seen it?
>
> MOST SHULS HAVE WINDOWS!

Most shuls don't have windows that are clear and facing west, through
which the sunset can be seen, at least from the men's level.

-- 
Zev Sero        "Natural resources are not finite in any meaningful
z...@sero.name    economic sense, mind-boggling though this assertion
                  may be. The stocks of them are not fixed but rather
                 are expanding through human ingenuity."
                                            - Julian Simon

On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 04:51:09PM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
> Most shuls don't have windows that are clear and facing west, through
> which the sunset can be seen, at least from the men's level.

I didn't understand the question, since the rare is still possible.
But how are we still batting this one around this long after I
posted the quote?

They stepped outside before ne'ilah, and the sun was painting colors
across the western sky.

-Micha

 
 
From:  Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>

: What scientists claim is that  evolution can explain the origin of 
species, 
: which is the very thing we  dispute. Not gonna loop to that because it's 
: been done and done and  done...[--TK]

Then you might recall that I posted examples of  documented speciation, and
not "just" to explain the fossil record. Check  out the examples  at
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speciation>.

"Macroevolution",  as far as I can tell, is used in popular parlance only as
a way to divide  off whatever aspect of evolution a Creationist wants to
claim hasn't been  seen in today's world from those that have, so that
they can deny it  occurs. And as more things are proven, "macroevolution"
shifts in meaning.  See 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macroevolution#Misuse>.

--  
Micha Berger 


 
>>>>>
 
I read the wiki articles and don't see what they add to the  discussion.  
The first is entirely speculative.  It uses the present  tense as if it is 
talking about something that happens right now under our eyes,  but is in fact 
talking about things that evolutionists believe happened eons  ago:
 
Example: "There are four geographic modes of speciation in nature, based on 
 the extent to which speciating populations are geographically isolated 
from one  another: allopatric, peripatric, parapatric and sympatric." 
 
Example:  "During allopatric speciation, a population splits into two  
geographically isolated populations (for example, by habitat fragmentation due  
to geographical change such as mountain building). The isolated populations 
then  undergo genotypic and/or phenotypic divergence." 
 
Example: "In peripatric speciation, a subform of allopatric speciation, new 
 species are formed in isolated, smaller peripheral populations that are  
prevented from exchanging genes with the main population."
 
Did you get the choice bit about "geographical change such as mountain  
building"?  It's using the present tense to talk about things that take  
millions of years to happen.
 
No new species have ever occurred in actual historic time except in the  
most trivial sense that children come into being that cannot mate with their  
parents -- e.g., some kind of hybrid grass that can't reproduce with its 
male or  female progenitor grasses.  It's still grass with the exact DNA it  
inherited from pater and mater.
 
Not only do they define "evolution" in a very elastic way, they also define 
 "species" elastically, so they can use trivial everyday phenomena to 
"prove"  events that happened millions of years ago.
 
Your second wiki link takes us to an anti-religious polemic dressed up  as 
science.  Done and done and done, thank you.
 
But I do have a question for you.  Why the contempt for  "Creationists"?  
Aren't YOU a creationist?  Don't you /have/ to be a  creationist to be on 
Avodah?
 

--Toby Katz
=============
Romney -- good  values, good family, good hair


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120229/230168b9/attachment-0001.htm>

On 29/02/2012 8:33 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 04:39:42PM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
>> >  I'm not sure what you mean by this.  Surely they didn't keep anything;
>> >  whatever they took on the 29th of Adar in lieu of wages, they sold back
>> >  on the 1st of Nissan, so this had no net effect on the accumulated size
>> >  of the mixture....
> I already pointed you to the gemara in Sheqalim which says otherwise.
>
> A person from Beis Avtimas could be maqdish the qetores back to
> the beis hamiqdash for service. Thus, they DID take it home. See
> Sheqalim 11b in the Bavli edition.

Where are you seeing this in the gemara?  The gemara seems pretty clear
that this was purely a formality.

-- 
Zev Sero        "Natural resources are not finite in any meaningful
z...@sero.name    economic sense, mind-boggling though this assertion
                  may be. The stocks of them are not fixed but rather
                 are expanding through human ingenuity."
                                            - Julian Simon

On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 08:59:35PM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
>> A person from Beis Avtimas could be maqdish the qetores back to
>> the beis hamiqdash for service. Thus, they DID take it home. See
>> Sheqalim 11b in the Bavli edition.
>
> Where are you seeing this in the gemara?  The gemara seems pretty clear
> that this was purely a formality.

Does what you're talking about sound like what I described? So why did
you post this second question rather than just ask where I found it?

Look for R' Yosi bei R' Bun's attempt to prove that R' Yosi bar Chanina
must hold like Shemuel, and R' Yehoshua ben Levi like R' Yochanan.
He then quotes R' Yochanan as saying someone who is maqdish his nechasim
and it includes qetores, it can be used. RYBC argues that he must hold
like RYBL who says qetores could be made in chol vessels. Because if
it had to made in qadosh vessels, how could this guy's private stash be
kosher for qetores? R' Hosheia disspells the linkage; it's possible R'
Yochanan is talking about someone from Beis Avtimas. Because Beis Avtimas
DID take the stuff home, and therefore he could have a private stash of
qetores that was made in the BHMQ's keilim.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             I always give much away,
mi...@aishdas.org        and so gather happiness instead of pleasure.
http://www.aishdas.org           -  Rachel Levin Varnhagen
Fax: (270) 514-1507


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 29, Issue 31
**************************************

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..."