Avodah Mailing List

Volume 31: Number 91

Sun, 19 May 2013

• 1. Re: Are there actual limudei chol? (Ben Waxman)
• 2. Re: Are there actual limudei chol? (Ezra Chwat)
• 3. orlah (Eli Turkel)
• 4. Caleb's Shavuot Lesson - Just Do It! (Prof. Levine)
• 5. Electricity on Shabbas - R' Asher Weiss (Chana Luntz)

I wasn't making such a large statement, just something much simpler: 
that you can't claim that according to the Rambam everyone needs to 
learn astronomy, physics, etc.
Ben

On 5/14/2013 6:33 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> Are you arguing that not only are limudei chol part of Torah, but even 
> are the Pardes? The reference I believe you're making is to Yedosei 
> haTorah 4:13.

In Rav Qapah's understanding of Rambam's Hashkafah, precise critical
scientific study is to be considered obligatory Limudey Kodesh.
See MaharY Qapeh z"l, Tchumim 2 (1981) pp.242-251; English translation
in Crossroads- halacha and the Modern World (1987), pp.109-116; on above-
Z. Langermann Aleph I (2001) pp. 338.

In any case Rambam states explicitly in intro to Pereq Heleq that much
of what we would consider historical scholarship is Bitul Zman. Still,
this has to be defined, what he describes as "the books found among the
Arabs on the dynasties of kings and their practices". Obviously this
does not include Toldot Hakhamim and in particular the transmission
lines of the Masora which he deals with at length in intro to Mishnah.

Ezra Chwat
blog: Giluy Milta B'Alma: http: http://imhm.blogspot.com/

We had a question in our shiur which no one could answer after asking some
rabbis

Rambam paskens that Orlah today is from the Torah.
Mishne Lemelech asks how can that be since for terumot and maaserot (and
most shitot shemita)
we say that the land no longer has kedusha on a Torah level. If so how can
Orlah today be more chamur than chutz laaretz which is halacha lemoshe
mi-siai and so has several kulot.

The Mishne LeMelech's question seems very strong nevertheless SA paskens
like Rambam.
The question is why?

R Chaim Kanevsky gives an answer that Orlah started immediately upon
entering the land and not 14 years later. We didnt find the answer very
convincing and RCK offers no further explanations of the difference.
Does anyone know of other answers for the difference between
termot&maaserot and orlah?

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-a
ishdas.org/attachments/20130519/a5268c70/attachment.html>

See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCf8dE9J1cc

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20130519/0876fae6/attachment-0001.htm>

R' Yitzchok
<http://www.cross-currents.com/archives/author/yitzchok-adlerstein/>
Adlerstein on Cross Currents has a piece entitled Cutting Edge Teshuvos at:
http://www.cross-currents.com/archives/2013/05/03/cutting-edge-teshuvos/

 

In which he says:

>Moreover, he promotes his own, new argument for the impermissibility of all
electric devices, based on a Yerushalmi. (According to Rav Weiss, the
Yerushalmi holds - followed by Rambam- that any >important accomplishment of
purpose has to be melachah, even if it does not seem to fall into one of the
categories in Perek Klal Gadol. It will perforce be subsumed by the
>melachah of makeh >bepatish.)

In the comments section I wrote: 

Without the sefer, I am clearly only going on the snippet summary you have
provided - but then I asked:

How does he distinguish electricity from the toilet flushing case (in
American do you say bathroom flushing?)? That too is an important
accomplishment of purpose, which as I understand it has the exact same
scenario as an electricity circuit but writ large (ie the closing of the
circuit causes the water to flow, just as the closing of a circuit causes
the electricity to flow).

Also is he rejecting all the heterim such as folding and unfolding a buggy
(pushchair? pram?) and similar forms of assembly based on the idea that
something that was meant to be taken apart and put together again, and is
taken apart and put together again in exactly the same way, does not
constitute makeh b'patish (or boneh). These too seem to be accomplishing a
significant purpose (before I didn't have anything to put my baby in, now I
do).

These are all obvious questions, so I imagine he deals with them, but how?

Elsewhere in the piece RYA quoted RAW as saying:

>According to scientific analysis, the concept of "davar she-eino miskaven"
does not exist. Every davar she-eino miskaven is really a psik reisha.
According to scientific truth, nothing occurs without a >cause that makes it
occur. Anyone who drags a chair or bed (which [when it does produce a furrow
] is still termed a psik reisha) could have come to know before the fact -
through scientific ?>examination of the weight of the furniture and the soil
conditions - whether he would create the furrow or not. If in the end the
furrow is created, it was only because the laws of Nature ordained this
>from the beginning. Nonetheless, it is clear from a halachic standpoint
that we call the dragging of the furniture davar she-eino miskaven [and
permit it]. This is because according to the reality that >appears before
our pedestrian eyes, we cannot know if a furrow will be created or not.


And I responded to this section with a PS that read:

PS quantum mechanics actually says that you never really have a psik resha,
it is only Newtonian mechanics that leads you to the conclusion set out here
that there is always a psik resha since you could always determine if or if
not a furrow would be made if you investigated the physics properly.
However, since quantum mechanics is understood to reduce to Newtonian
mechanics on the large scales we are talking about, eg making a furrow, (ie
it becomes so statistically unlikely that the uncertainty of quantum
mechanics will have an effect on the furrow that it can safely be ignored) I
don't suppose it matters in that context. This is not true, however, on the
electron level where quantum mechanics plays a big part in semiconductor
analysis, which I suspect is at the heart of many of the modern devices
being discussed. Is this dicotomy taken into account?

RYA responded to my comments as follows:

[YA - I am going to (largely) resist the temptation to do halacha on CC,
especially since I can't speak for Rav Weiss. Briefly, though:
1) Clearly when he speaks about some significant purpose, he means to
differentiate between the operation of an electric device and all the
examples you cite. I think he means that the purposeful harnessing of an
electric current per se is what is significant. Your other examples like
allowing a flow of water through a pipe (interestingly, one of the arguments
that RSZA used against the CI's boneh) and opening a baby stroller do not
accomplish something new so much as utilize what is already there or
assembled but waiting to be opened. 2) I don't think that quantum effects
are going to figure in halacha. He is pretty clear about stating that
halacha has its own ways of measuring things, based on the way the average
person sees things. (Years ago, I tried to make the case to Rav Elyashiv
that circuits controlled by a few electrons in a chip are just not
comparable to the CI's circuit. He thought about it, but then rejected it.]

I then responded to these comments in a further  comment which at the moment
is awaiting moderation, but, taking on board RYA's comment that Cross
Currents is not really the place for this discussion, thought it might be a
better idea to move it to Avodah.

 

So when RYA wrote:


>Briefly, though:
>1) Clearly when he speaks about some significant purpose, he means to
differentiate between the operation of an electric device and all the
examples you cite.

I responded:

Understood. But how? That to me is the million dollar question: - how can
you differentiate between these cases and electricity? That was really the
question I was asking you (in the absence of being able to ask R' Weiss).

> I think he means that the purposeful harnessing of an electric current per
se is what is significant. Your other examples like allowing a flow of water
through a pipe (interestingly, one of the >arguments that RSZA used against
the CI's boneh) and opening a baby stroller do not accomplish something new 

The reason I referred specifically to the bathroom (even though I apologise
for it not being the most savoury example), rather than just the flow of
water through a pipe, was because the bathroom example goes a step further
than mere movement of water through a pipe. The water that is moved through
the pipe is purposefully harnessed to flush waste down and away, thereby
achieving what I think most would agree to be an action of significant
value. ie the water that is mobilised by your action is set up to be
harnessed and does work. That is why I thought it even more directly
analagous to the purposeful harnessing of an electric circuit than mere
movement of water through a pipe, such as to provide drinking water.

>so much as utilize what is already there or assembled but waiting to be
opened.

Yes, that as I understand it is the distinction made vis a vis the unfolding
of a baby buggy (or a folding chair in the more classic halachic
literature). But prima facie a circuit is something that was assembled and
waiting to be closed and had been opened and closed before many times. I
guess the question that I am asking is: - is R' Weiss saying: If you were to
close an electric circuit and allow the current to flow round and round, as
currents are wont to do and have done many times before, would that be
completely mutar were you not then using that current for something (ie some
device) which then falls within the significant purpose definition? Or is he
really still saying (as the CI says) that the closure of the circuit in and
of itself is the issur d'orisa whether or not it actually does anything
useful?

If that is what he is saying (ie that you need a significant purpose, which
seemed to be what you were suggesting): - what purposes are significant? If
I was to somehow use an electric current to do the work of flushing away the
bathroom waste how would that then differ from the water pressure situation?

> 2) I don't think that quantum effects are going to figure in halacha.

I wrote in my response which is still awaiting moderation:

Agreed. I just added my PS, because as published it was a misstatement of
the physics, even though I don't think stating it the way it was stated
affects the halacha at all, it just jarred.

However on second thoughts, I wanted to further explore this. RYA said:

 

>Years ago, I tried to make the case to Rav Elyashiv that circuits
controlled by a few electrons in a chip are just not comparable to the CI's
circuit. He thought about it, but then rejected it

 

But to the extent that we are relying on quantum effects (eg the random
jumping of electrons between layers in a transistor as being a necessary
trigger for its operation, without which any actions of mine would be
ineffective) are we not seriously into grama territory.   If not, why not? 



Regards

 

Chana



 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20130519/18e6c4c8/attachment-0001.htm>

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


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 91
**************************************

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