Avodah Mailing List

Volume 31: Number 23

Mon, 11 Feb 2013

• 1. Re: A question for the chevre (martin brody)
• 2. A question for the chevre (David Riceman)
• 3. Re: A question for the chevre (menucha)
• 4. The MaHaRal that will not go Away (Meir Rabi)
• 5. Re: The MaHaRal that will not go Away (Micha Berger)
• 6. A question for the Chevre (saul newman)
• 7. Re: A question for the Chevre (Micha Berger)
• 8. Shiur of an Etzbah(finger) (Michael Elkohen)
• 9. Re: Shiur of an Etzbah(finger) (Micha Berger)
• 10. Re: Keri'ah and berikha (Moshe Y. Gluck)
• 11. Re: Shiur of an Etzbah(finger) (Simon Montagu)
• 12. Re: Shiur of an Etzbah(finger) (Micha Berger)
• 13. Rabbi Nathan Marcus Adler's responsum on making matzah in America from 1850 (Prof. Levine)
• 14. Re: Is Panentheism Heresy (Lisa Liel)
• 15. Re: Is Panentheism Heresy (Zev Sero)

> A Jew was drafted into the Russian army, and went to the Chofetz Chaim with
> the following shailah: They had given this Jew his choice of two units, one
> where he could eat kosher but would have to be mechalel Shabbos, and
> another where he could keep Shabbos, but would have to eat treif. Which
> should he choose? ...                             The Chofetz Chaim
> explained that he could always hope to be Shomer Shabbos again some day in
> the future, but once one eats the treif, it becomes part of him and it is
> impossible to *totally* cleanse oneself of it.

> Akiva Miller

Of course it's not a true story. What does it mean" impossible to
*totally* cleanse oneself of it."?
What about teshuva? This sort of statement rejects the essence of Judaism!

Martin Brody
>

RMZ:

<<You have a secular Jew who's on his way to Africa for the rest of his 
life, and you have an opportunity to teach him one mitzva that he'll 
keep until he dies. He has no opportunity there to continue his growth 
there and will never go beyond just keeping this one mitzva. Do you 
teach him: a) to love Hashem, or b) not to take bones out of a fish on 
Shabbos?>>

Frankly the premise that "He has no opportunity there to continue his 
growth there and will never go beyond just keeping this one mitzva" 
strikes me as incomprehensible.  I'd pick c) Talmud Torah so that he 
will be able to continue his growth there.

David Riceman

>>                  The Chofetz Chaim
>>explained that he could always hope to be Shomer Shabbos again some day in
>>the future, but once one eats the treif, it becomes part of him and it is
>>impossible to *totally* cleanse oneself of it.

>>Akiva Miller

>Of course it's not a true story. What does it mean" impossible to
>*totally* cleanse oneself of it."?
>What about teshuva? This sort of statement rejects the essence of Judaism!

>Martin Brody

Meshech Chochma Devarim 6,11
"The nature of forbdden foods is to be "metamtem et halev" and therefore
one should be mechallel shabbos to feed a choleh rather than feed him
a neveila."

menucha

I asked a simple question: Does the Maharal [Nesivos Olam Nesiv HaTorah,
ench Ch 15] say that CORRECT decisions are not Torah [and destroy the
world] when there is no Talmud behind them?

As best I can penetrate R Micha?s response, he seems to be answering that
the MaHaRal is not talking about Paskening Halacha LeMaAseh but is talking
about TTorah. R Micha writes, ?This isn't a statement about halakhah and
how one should decide to do things lemaaseh. It's saying that someone who
doesn't engage in talmud isn't performing talmud Torah.?

I must therefore assume that R Micha?s answer to my question is in the
negative. According to R Micha, Correct decisions are Torah even when there
is no Talmud behind them. However, this is the position of Rashi with whom
the MaHaRal makes it abundantly clear that he disagrees with, in the
strongest possible terms.



I have not read but the excerpts of RMLBroyde as quoted by R Micha.

?When the Bet Yosef ordered [compiled?] the Shulhan Arukh his intention was
that one would first learn the essential laws and their sources from the
Tur and the Bet Yosef, {but since these bring} numerous differing opinions
for each law, he {compiled} the Shulhan Arukh to make known the ruling in
practice for each law. ?

?It was not his intention, however, that we learn it alone, since the law
is not able to sit well with a person [what does this mean, ?the law does
not sit well??; Does it mean that one does not understand it?; that one may
come to make erroneous rulings?; that one does not like it?] unless he
understands the reasoning behind it.

From these excerpts it appears that Rabbi Broyde disagrees with the MaHaRal
who maintains that the Tur and the RaMBaM would not have compiled their
works had they known it would lead to people abandoning the learning of the
Talmud. According to Rabbi Broyde learning the Tur and BY would be enough.
It is only the Shulchan Aruch that is too brief and cryptic.

In that case what Rabbi Broyde says has no relevance to our discussion
about the MaHaRal.

I do not know what R Micha means, I don?t know what he has added, when he
re-phrases the MaHaRal to define the MeVaLey Olam ? the destroyers of the
world, those who Pasken from their Mishnah, as, ?so out of touch with how
Halakhah works, they only study case law?

R Micha urges that we notice that MaHaRal?s comments are not directed to
the masses. I don?t see this at all. Please tell us where this is alluded
to.

It also sounds as though the desperate plea and despondency of the MaHaRal
is misunderstood. MaHaRal wails that compared to what we are doing to day,
HaLeVay we would be learning the Mishnah. That way at least we would be at
the threshold of the Talmud and there might be a small chance that we may
progress to the Talmud. But as it stands today [says MaHaRal, of his times]
it is a disaster of much greater proportions because by consulting the Tur
and the RaMBaM and the ShA, we have moved even further from ever getting to
learn Talmud.

The MaHaRal certainly says nothing like, ?WRT to pesaq, rather than neglect
of talmud Torah, case law would be sufficient because it's the reishis
letalmud vehaschalah eilav.? [BTW, that sentence does not make any sense to
me. What is the word -RATHER- doing in that sentence? Do Australian brains
and language operate on a different frequency or wavelength?] Please
correct me, direct me to the words of the MaHaRal that say anything
remotely like that.

RaMBaM in his intro suggests that his Mishneh Torah be used as the text for
TSBP; how does the MaHaRal in that case suggest that RaMBaM would have
preferred not to publish his Sefer had he known that it would be used to
avoid learning Talmud? That?s not a problem. Just keep in mind RaMBaMs
guidelines in Hilchos TT for how much time one must dedicate to TT. And he
is not providing guidelines for Poskim but for the entire Jewish People.

Best,

Meir G. Rabi
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20130211/d6ce5b8d/attachment-0001.htm>

On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 03:18:53AM +1100, Meir Rabi wrote:
: As best I can penetrate R Micha's response, he seems to be answering that
: the MaHaRal is not talking about Paskening Halacha LeMaAseh but is talking
: about TTorah....
: I must therefore assume that R Micha's answer to my question is in the
: negative. According to R Micha, Correct decisions are Torah even when there
: is no Talmud behind them. However, this is the position of Rashi with whom
: the MaHaRal makes it abundantly clear that he disagrees with, in the
: strongest possible terms.

He is clear that he disagrees with this being the intent of the gemara,
not the idea itself.

The Maharal thereby divorces the quote from the topic of pesaq altogether.
You want to read him as saying they're related, but in the opposite way
as Rashi -- that talmud that leads to incorrect pesaq is still halachically
preferable. I'm not even sure how that's meaningful; what's left to the
idea of "incorrect pesaq" if the thought process *defines* correctness
regardless of results.

The Maharal says that if the gemara meant that ruling from mishnah led
to mistakes, and that's what destroys the world, it would refer to
"hora'as ta'us" rather than "hora'as halakhah". And thus the gemara
must be talking someone who learns miqra and mishnah to the exclusion
of talmud even when he gets the halakhah right. These people destroy
the world because it's talmud that is the third pillar. Even though
the pesaqim actually are accurate and halakhah.

...
: R Micha urges that we notice that MaHaRal?s comments are not directed to
: the masses. I don't see this at all. Please tell us where this is alluded
: to.

1- He talks about hora'ah, as does the quote he's working with. As in "yoreh
yoreh", not as in a person deciding for themselves zil qeri bei rav issues
that do not require a poseiq.

2- The Maharal compares this group to those who aren't meshamshim their
rabbanim of the prior paragraph. Again, a discussion of the shalsheles
hamesorah for pesaq, not that of the masses.

: It also sounds as though the desperate plea and despondency of the MaHaRal
: is misunderstood. MaHaRal wails that compared to what we are doing to day,
: HaLeVay we would be learning the Mishnah. That way at least we would be at
: the threshold of the Talmud and there might be a small chance that we may
: progress to the Talmud. But as it stands today [says MaHaRal, of his times]
: it is a disaster of much greater proportions because by consulting the Tur
: and the RaMBaM and the ShA, we have moved even further from ever getting to
: learn Talmud.

Although he feels that the Rambam and the Tur weren't written for this
purpose, and the SA was -- which is why he came out against the SA.

Nothing in this paragraph has to do with claiming that it's more important
for pesaq to be based on thought than it be accurate. There is nothing in
it with which I disagree.

: The MaHaRal certainly says nothing like, "WRT to pesaq, rather than neglect
: of talmud Torah, case law would be sufficient because it's the reishis
: letalmud vehaschalah eilav." ...

Pg 69, col 1, line 6, starting with the final word "aval". Yes, the Maharal
says "bedor zeh", but he distinguishes mishnayos in that it's "asuyag
letalmud ki hatalmud hu peirush halakhah". Not his later point that pasqening
for mishnayos is the best we can do.

...
: RaMBaM in his intro suggests that his Mishneh Torah be used as the text for
: TSBP; how does the MaHaRal in that case suggest that RaMBaM would have
: preferred not to publish his Sefer had he known that it would be used to
: avoid learning Talmud? That's not a problem. Just keep in mind RaMBaMs
: guidelines in Hilchos TT for how much time one must dedicate to TT. And he
: is not providing guidelines for Poskim but for the entire Jewish People.

But you said the Maharal's disdain for codes was also even for the entire
Jewish People.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Like a bird, man can reach undreamed-of
mi...@aishdas.org        heights as long as he works his wings.
http://www.aishdas.org   But if he relaxes them for but one minute,
Fax: (270) 514-1507      he plummets downward.   - Rav Yisrael Salanter

are the LR's mitzva campaigns any proof one way or the other?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20130210/2dd76f28/attachment-0001.htm>

On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 12:23:23PM -0800, saul newman wrote:
: are the LR's mitzva campaigns any proof one way or the other?

I doubt the LR figures that he is advocating one mitzvah for people
who will afterward not have any exposure to learn other mitzvos. Thus,
engaging the person with an experience has value beyond the mitzvah
itself.

This question was raised, pretty artificially, so as to eliminate that
factor, and is asking about the merits of ahavas H' vs boreir in and of
themselves alone.

So I do not think you can prove much about what the LR would say in
our situation.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

With regard to various halakhic rulings we are told that things need to
be the width of a finger? What are the various opinions regarding that.

Specifically I am wondering if anyone knows what Rav Ovadia Yosef
rules in regard to the width of a finger.

-- 
??? ????? ???? ?????

On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 10:37:22PM +0200, R Michael Elkohen wrote:
: With regard to various halakhic rulings we are told that things need to
: be the width of a finger? What are the various opinions regarding that.

Wouldn't you just use 1/24 of your favorite shitah for ammah?

1 amaah = 6 tefachim
1 tefach = 4 etzba'os

Since I do not know what ROY holds WRT the ammah, I can't answer what
he would say is an etzbah.

BTW, according to Y-mi Shabbos 8:1 (vilna 54b) and Sheqalim 3:2 (vilna
13b, bavli 9a), a revi'is is
    2 x 2 x 1-5/6 cubic etzba'os

According to the Bavli Pesachim 109a, though, a revi'is is
    2 x 2 x 2.7 cubic etzba'os

Tosafos (Pesachim 109a "revi'is") offers two possible solutions, both of
which justify the Bavli by saying the Y-mi is describing a cylinder in a
way that is an over-estimate lehachmir. Of course, given the much bigger
machloqesin over liquid measures compared to those over linear lengths,
this isn't going to help much.

The answers, just for tangential discussion:

1- The Y-mi is describing a cylinder of radius 2 etba'os and a height
of 1-5/6 etzba'os -- but all their etzba'os are those of Tzipori. The
Bavli is describing a block in etzba'os Midbarios. A Tzipori ammah
(and thus etzbah) are 1-1/6 the size of the Midbari ones.

So the Y-mi comes to
    pi * (2 * 1-1/6) ^2 * (1.6 * 1-1/6) = appx 11.4 etzbaos ^3
in Midbari etzbaos, compared to the bavli's
    2 x 2 x 2.7 = 10.8 etzba'os midbarios

2- The Y-mi is describing a cylinder that can encompass a 2x2 etzba
square, ie the radius is sqrt(2) etzba'os -- albeit all etzba'os
are Midbarios. On Eruvin 76b we see Chazal estimated that a circle is
1-1/2 times the area of the inscribed square, and by that estimate
we would get
   2 * 2 * 1-5/6 * 3/2 = 11 etzba'os



Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             It isn't what you have, or who you are, or where
mi...@aishdas.org        you are,  or what you are doing,  that makes you
http://www.aishdas.org   happy or unhappy. It's what you think about.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                        - Dale Carnegie

R' AF:
: The Midrash Rabba Bereishit 39:12 includes a discussion about bowing...
:> Rabbi Chiya Rabba her'a kheri'ah lifnei Rebbi venitrape; uvar Sissi her'a
:> verikha lifnei Rebbi venifsach velo nitrape.

: Question: what was the likely nature of their injuries? Why was R' Sissi's
: injury worse?
R' MB:
1- I had always imaging a slipped disk. Chazanim have a hard time getting up
from keri'ah without using their hands -- and that's with people on either
side to grab his arms and help. If R' Chiya Ruba tried doing so without
help, and we do not know how old he was, it seems quite likely he would
injure his back by trying to do so.
<SNIP>
-------------------------


physiatrists, or physical therapists on list before I gave my own uninformed
two cents. But, since not very many people addressed this, I just want to
add that I googled gymnast and contortionist together with the words spinal
injury, injury, and so on. There are many, many ways to injure your back and
hips! Could very well be that one was injured one way and the other another,
because they were in different positions (as per the gemara). But I think we
really need the professionals' opinion as to what was the specific way -
does anyone know a chiropractor? Or a gymnast? 

KT,
MYG

ROY's Yalkut Yosef is available online at
http://www.ateret4u.com/online/f_01355.html, including a version with the
whole book on one page at http://www.ateret4u.com/online/f_01355_all.html.
Search there for "shiur etzba" and you will find that he gives it as 2 cm.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20130211/f11893de/attachment-0001.htm>

On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 08:12:30AM +0200, Simon Montagu wrote:
: ROY's Yalkut Yosef...
: Search there for "shiur etzba" and you will find that he gives it as 2 cm.

Shitas R' Chaim Naeh, the 48 cm (18.9") ammah.

RCN was a Lub chassid born in Chevron (1890) to a talmid of the Sedei
Chemed, learned in Ohel Moshe ander R' Yeruchem Diskin, and ended up
running Yeshivas EY for Jews exiled from EY by the Ottomans during WW I.

As RYGB wrote back on 30-Nov-2001
<http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol08/v08n063.shtml>:
> I do not think RCN counts as a Chabad Posek - he was the safra d'dyna
> of the pre-State Badatz, IIRC, and recorded Minhag Yerushalayim, which
> is based on the Rambam's measure of an etzba, which in turn was based,
> IIRC, on the size of the Egyptian drachma. The Minhag Yerushalayim was the
> minhag ha'mekkubal b'chol tefutzos Yisroel (well, maybe not Prague, where
> the Noda b'Yehuda introduced the CI shiurim - forgive the anachronism)
> until the CI asserted the NbY to be correct. V'ho'ra'ayah - the bechers
> of the CC and R' Yisroel Salanter were smaller than the CI shiur.

(And in the years since, I asked the CC's grandson who actually held
and measured the becher. The statement about the CC's becher is true.)

So, ROY pesaq should be unsurprising. It's only an Ashk thing that we
feel insecure about the smaller shiurim.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             If you're going through hell
mi...@aishdas.org        keep going.
http://www.aishdas.org                   - Winston Churchill
Fax: (270) 514-1507

See http://tinyurl.com/b9bykof for the Chief Rabbi of England's 
response to how machine matzos were being made in America at this time. YL

On 2/8/2013 3:47 PM, Zev Sero wrote:
>
> That's not metaphor, and it's not nevuah, it's a claim (true or not) 
> of an actual visitation by a neshomo, just like Rebbi used to come 
> home to make kiddush, or R Elozor br Shimon used to pasken shaylos 
> from the attic after his passing (which you surely agree happened).

Why surely?  I'm not at all convinced that this happened literally.

Lisa

On 10/02/2013 10:33 PM, Lisa Liel wrote:
> On 2/8/2013 3:47 PM, Zev Sero wrote:
>>
>> That's not metaphor, and it's not nevuah, it's a claim (true or
>> not) of an actual visitation by a neshomo, just like Rebbi used to
>> come home to make kiddush, or R Elozor br Shimon used to pasken
>> shaylos from the attic after his passing (which you surely agree
>> happened).
>
> Why surely?  I'm not at all convinced that this happened literally.

Really?  How can those two stories be read non-literally?


-- 
Zev Sero               A citizen may not be required to offer a 'good and
z...@sero.name          substantial reason' why he should be permitted to
                        exercise his rights. The right's existence is all
                        the reason he needs.
                            - Judge Benson E. Legg, Woollard v. Sheridan


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 31, Issue 23
**************************************

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..."


A list of common acronyms is available at at
        http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/acronyms.cgi
(They are also visible in the web archive copy of each digest.)