Volume 32: Number 5
Thu, 09 Jan 2014
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Message: 1
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2014 15:02:36 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] "Binfol oyivcha" does not apply to goyim
On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 11:57:15AM -0600, Lisa Liel wrote:
: No, you didn't note any such thing, because none of them do. There are
: not diametrically opposed statements on this issue in Chazal. You are
: reading the issue of the Half-Hallel incorrectly, since your way requires
: a major machloket in Chazal that Chazal were apparently unaware of.
But of course I did. See my blgo version at
<http://www.aishdas.org/asp/compassion-for-our-enemies>.
The Pesiqta deRav Kahane (Mandelbaum Edition, siman 29, 189a) says the
reason for half Hallel on the last day of Pesach is because "maasei
Yadei tov'im bayam, ve'atim omerim shirah". This is also in the Medrash
Harininu (which admittedly I hadn't heard of before) and the Yalqut
Shim'oni (the Perishah points you to Parashas Emor, remez 566).
Even if the Bsvli seems to move on from that suggestion, it doesn't
reject the idea that mournign the death of the enemy is wrong, as long
as you don't lose sight of celebrating being saved by them. Although,
to R' Aharon Kotler (mishnas R' Aharon III pg 3) points out that if
you read carefully the gemara (Eirukhin 10b) only searches for another
reason for half-Hallel on ch"m, and that the medrash's answer stands
WRT the 7th day even according to the Bavli.
The Midrash Harninu or the Shibolei haLeqet (174:69, our only source
for the medrash) associate the medrash with "binfol". Since I don't
have the original text of the medrash, the ShL may have added that part
after an implicit end-quote. I can't tell. The Beis Yoseif (OC 490:4,
"Kol") cites the gemara, then quotes the Shibolei haLeqet as a second
reason. The Kaf haChaim (OC 685:29) brings down the Yafeh haLeiv (3:3)
use this midrash to establish the idea that we mourn the downfall of our
enemy in order to explain why there is no berakhah on Parashas Zakhor
(remembering the requirement to destroy Amaleiq).
So, we can agree now that it does date to Chazal (the age of the
non-poetic portions of PdRK isn't even questioned by the more skeptical
of the academics), could well be accepted by the gemara WRT the last day
of Pesach, and does indeed predate the acharonim.
: Nor is your citation of the views of an Achron (the Pnei Moshe, who
: lived in the 1700s) on the question a contradiction. We're all very
: well aware that there are Achronim who share your view on this subject.
Actually, the claim was that the idea in question was a non-O borrowing
of Xian ethic. So I don't know if "we're all very aware". Maybe now.
I can bring more pre-Reform sources too.
But in any case, it's not the Penei Moshe's chiddush. It's inherent in
the Yerushalmi itself. The gemara concludes that it's wrong to celebrate
the death of reshaim from something unstated but in a pasuq about the
death of enemy and non-Jewsh combatants.
The PM days that that something was, the missing "ki tov", but that's not
necessary to make the point in question. The PM is also only inserting
an idea from the parallel Bavli, anyway.
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger If a person does not recognize one's own worth,
mi...@aishdas.org how can he appreciate the worth of another?
http://www.aishdas.org - Rabbi Yaakov Yosef of Polnoye,
Fax: (270) 514-1507 author of Toldos Yaakov Yosef
Go to top.
Message: 2
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2014 16:34:38 -0500
Subject: [Avodah] Tools & Goals
My latest post on Torah Musings, the e-Zine that evolved out of RGStudent's
blog. http://torahmusings.com/2014/01/tools-and-goals
It is my attempt to start a conversation that I believe it is CRITICAL
for the observant community to have. The key difference, I believe, between
this and numerous other articles of this ilk is that I shift from
"consciousness raising" about an issue to suggesting concrete ideas
about solutions. I am hoping we can start talking about solving what
RSWolbe might have called the frumkeit problem.
Meanwhile, to tempt you into reading the full essay, which I'll
include below, and perhaps sharing the pretty version from the link
above, here are some snippets from the "fun part", the problem
identification.
Rava's idea that "those who go to its left, it is a sam hamaves,
an elixir of death" can be somewhat frightening. It means that it's
possible to be a meticulously observant Jew with an intense program
of Torah study and still be headed in the wrong direction, or as we
would say in today's parlance, "off the derekh". (Even if we usually
use that idiom to refer to who those who give up conforming to the
religious norms of our community, to speak of a derekh does mean
that the norms are used to pursue a "path".) Worse, Rava tells us
that a person who is fully engaged with the tools the Torah provides
but lost sight of, or never formed, a vision of what it is he is to
build is indeed worse off -- poisoned, or as the Vilna Gaon put it,
with a garden overgrown with weeds!
"How would this play out communally?
"One possible outcome is that we would find a community of very
committed, very observant Jews, but who do not show all the signs
of the holiness the Torah is supposed to bring us to. This could
happen if...
"Another possible outcome is an idealistic community, but one
whose ideals are not Torah derived. In such a community ideals
would be taken from some segment of the surrounding culture,
and halakhah would be reduced to a means of "blessing"...
"A third possibility is particular to a community that teaches
the need to engage the world around it, to risk the battle
of its challenges in order to use what's positive in the
surrounding society to further our sanctity. Without a firm eye
and a constant striving toward an ideal, the energy it takes
to maintain this delicate balance too easily collapses...
"Do these portraits sound familiar?"
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger We are what we repeatedly do.
mi...@aishdas.org Thus excellence is not an event,
http://www.aishdas.org but a habit.
Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Aristotle
Tools and Goals
By Micha Berger on Jan 9, 14 4:30 am in Journal
The chorus of a song we used to sing in my day, decades ago, in NCSY
began:
Torah and mitzvos, these are our goals
Serving Hashem to strengthen our souls...
If we truly thought Torah and mitzvos are our goals, then we wouldn't be
looking beyond them to suggest we "serv[e] Hashem to..." something.1 The
lyrics initially sound true in an obvious way, but actually each line
describes a slightly different worldview, and the clash between them
raises fundamental questions about how we should be viewing our life work:
Is observance the ends, the purpose, of our lives, or is it the means
and the goal lies beyond it? And if they are the means, do we need to
consciously frame the purpose of our lives, or should we just concern
ourselves with following the halakhah, and rest assured that the goal
will take care of itself?
I
Chazal already discussed our problem. The Talmud already tells us that
embracing the Torah alone is not sufficient for it to serve as a "sam
hachaim" - a medicine for life:
R. Chananel bar Papa said: What is meant by, "Hear, for I will speak
princely things," (Mishlei 8:6)? Why are the words of the Torah compared
to a prince? To tell you: just as a prince has power of life and death,
so too the words of the Torah [have potential for] life or death. As
Rava said: to those who go to the right side of it, it is a a sam
hachaim, a medicine for life; to those who go to its left, it is a
sam hamaves, an elixir of death. (Shabbos 88b)
Rabbi Chananel bar Papa acknowledges that there are ways the Torah can be
used constructively, and ways it can be abused. Rava here answers that
there is a "right side" and a "left side", and one can take the Torah's
words in either direction. Following halakhah alone is insufficient
to the health of one's soul, and in fact the word's of Torah can be
abused to harm it. A second Gemara gives us a little more detail into
Rava's position:
R' Yehoshua ben Levi said: What is meant by, "And this is the Torah
which Moses placed [before the Benei Yisrael]." (Devarim 4:44) If
one merits, it becomes for him a sam hachaim; if one does not merit,
it becomes for him a sam hamaves. And this idea is what Rava said:
If you work with it, it is for him a sam hachaim; if you do not work
with it, it is for him a sam hamaves. Rabbi Shmuel bar Nachameini
said: Rabbi Yonasan found an implication [of the verses]. It says,
"The appointments of G-d are straight, they gladden the heart,"
(Tehillim 19:9) and it says, "The word of G-d is trying," (Tehillim
18:31). If one merits, it makes him happy; if one does not merit, he
is tried. Reish Lakish said: From the essence of the [second] verse we
learn this - if he is worthy, he is tried for [and found deserving of]
life; if he is not worthy, he is tried for death. (Yoma 72b)
Here we again see Rava explaining the notion that Torah can be a medicine
or a poison, but instead of speaking of "going to the right" he speaks
in terms of working with the Torah.
The other element in this Gemara is worthiness, a meritorious person
doesn't "merely" follow the halakhah, he works with the Torah to
make himself of worth. This is also the theme of the famous Ramban on
parashas Kedoshim. When the Torah states "Kedoshim tihyu ki Kadosh Ani
- Be kadosh [holy, sacred] for I Am Kadosh." (Vayikra 19:2) The Sifra
(a/k/a Toras Kohanim), comments writes "`kedoshim tihyu': perushim tihyu -
`be holy': you shall be separated". The Ramban (ad loc) explains the
medrash as saying "make yourself kadosh with that which is permitted
to you" by refraining from the permitted. Someone who does not can be a
"naval birshus haTorah - a disgusting [person] with the permission of the
Torah". By "permission", we mean the permission of specific halakhos;
what we're discussing is itself the Torah telling us that its call to
pursue a higher calling rules out becoming a debauch glutton who follows
the laws of taharas hamishpachah and kashrus.
The Vilna Gaon, as quoted in Even Sheleimah (1:11), also warns that
following halakhah and studying Torah are not a complete definition of
following the Word of G-d. He writes that the relationship of the Torah to
the soul is described by "a comparison to rain for the ground; it causes
what was planted there to grow, whether a sam hachaim or a sam hamaves,
a poison. Similarly, Torah causes what is in his heart to grow. If what
is in his heart is good, his yirah will grow; if what is in his heart is
a `root sprouting poison weed and wormwood' then the bitterness that is
in his head will grow." The Vilna Gaon bases himself on our Gemara, and
then concludes pragmatically, "Therefore, one must cleanse one's heart
every day, before study and after it, of impure attitudes and middos,
with a fear of sin and with good deeds...." If you start with desirable
plants, it will produce healthier, more beautiful plants. But if you
water weeds, you will only produce more weeds. Learning Torah without
attention to character refinement will simply produce more forceful
personalities with bad middos.
The Vilna Gaon defines the goal beyond observance in terms of middos,
but I do not wish to raise the question of how each of us would actually
frame the goal for ourselves. This is a question that would be more
amenable to a survey rather than a single "right answer" - the variety
of possible approaches is one of the key elements that divide the various
Orthodox movements. This is why Chazal speak of "shiv'im panim laTorah -
the seventy facets of the Torah." Shelomo advises us in Mishlei (22:6)
"[fix Hebrew] - educate the child according to His way, [so that] when
he also grows old he will not veer from it." Each person must find their
own facet, their own path.
Still, we do see that the Vilna Gaon does not believe it's enough to
study Torah and do mitzvos, to succeed in our mission in life we must
pay attention to what we are doing these things for.
II
The Vilna Gaon's understanding of Torah as a means to make something else
grow brings to mind the introduction of the Ketzos haChoshen. The Ketzos
bases his thought on a midrash (Bereishis Rabba 8:5) that describes the
debate in heaven that occurred when Hashem was about to make Adam. Some
were in favor of the idea, others agains. It applies the verse in Tehillim
(85:11), "[fix Hebrew] - Love and Truth fought together, Righteousness
and Peace kissed each other." The principle of Love saw our ability
to act lovingly, and voted for. Truth was against, since man lies so
frequently. Righteousness also saw our potential, and supported Adam's
creation. Peace was against, as a human being is full of strife. Hashem
took Truth and through it down to the ground. This is why the quote from
Tehillim continues (v. 12), "[fix Hebrew] - Let truth bloom up from the
earth." Man was created with Hashem's knowledge that with the existence
of free-willed beings, Truth would be submerged and have to emerge over
time through the process we call history. And only then would we have
both Truth and Peace.
The Ketzos notes that here truth is described as tatzmiach, blooming. When
we make the berakhah after an aliyah, we say "vechayei olam nata
besocheinu - eternal life [or perhaps: life of the world{-to-come}]
was planted within us." The Ketzos explains: Torah is the seed from
which our midrash tells us Truth blooms.
Notice the subtle but very important difference between the Vilna Gaon's
metaphor and the Ketzos's. In Even Sheleimah, the Vilna Gaon portrays
Torah as water, which enables whatever one has in one's soul to grow.
Torah could thus yield positive effects, or if one hadn't first tended
one's soul, it could yield spiritual "weeds".
According to the Ketzos, Torah is not likened to the water, but the seed.
Implied in this introduction is an assumption that Torah is part of
a process that will inevitably make Truth manifest in this world, it
is inherently constructive. In both cases the Torah is the means and
not the ends; but one makes the outcome dependent on how we use Torah,
and the other does not.
While we saw the Vilna Gaon's ideas present in the Gemara, Chazal make
statements to indicate the Ketzos's idea as well. For example, we are told
that even if one were acting out of insufficient motivation or ulterior
motive, Torah study or performance of a mitzvah is still of value,
"shemitokh shelo lishmah, ba lishmah - from within [doing a mitzvah] not
for its own sake, one comes to do it for its own sake." (Pesachim 50b,
Sanhedrin 105b, Nazir 23a)
The connection between action and emotion is cyclic. Usually we think
of actions as expressions of emotion, but it is equally true that action
causes and reinforces emotion. As the Chinukh puts it, "ha'adam nifal lefi
pe'ulaso," - a person is made according to his deeds (mitzvah #99, c.f.
#16, #40, #41, #96, #264, #299, #324). And so the performance of mitzvos
and following the Torah can initiate a positive feedback cycle that
leads to redemption.
This isn't a millennium-long dispute, but rather discussions of two
different situations. Hillel warns in Avos 1:13, "one who advances his
name loses his name". Rav Chaim Volozhiner comments (Ruach Chaim, ad loc)
that Hillel refers to someone who constantly learns Torah shelo lishmah,
for the sake of advancing his reputation and fame. Such study backfires,
and such a person would lose even the reputation he began with. The
Gemara's assurance that someone who acts for ulterior motive will come to
act lishmah is only the person who is trying to ascend, but needs other
motivations to actually carry through on that aspiration. "A person cannot
put his foot on the next rung up without taking it off the rung below."
And so, in the hands of Rav Chaim Volozhiner the concept that the Torah
will help one, as a positive spiral of action reinforcing intent which
in turn reinforces action, is really limited to the situation Rav Pava
called "going to the right" or "working with the Torah". The Torah is a
tool, but without a conscious effort beyond obeying the mitzvos to work
with that tool to fully to serve Hashem, we will not get the intended
benefit from it. Thus, observance alone is not enough. As this Gemara
implies, the problem is not simply that we are performing "[fix Hebrew]
- the commandments of men who learned by rote" (Yeshaiah 29:13), without
the necessary passion or intention. Thus, a community that follows the
Torah, even from habit without depth of feeling, should still gradually
develop people who do so lishmah, eventually making their tzelem Elokim,
their image of G-d, manifest. What Rava describes here is not a lack of
zeal or passion when lifting the tool of Torah, but an entire failure
to use Torah for the task for which it was given.
III
Rava's idea that "those who go to its left, it is a sam hamaves, an
elixir of death" can be somewhat frightening. It means that it's possible
to be a meticulously observant Jew with an intense program of Torah
study and still be headed in the wrong direction, or as we would say in
today's parlance, "off the derekh". (Even if we usually use that idiom
to refer to who those who give up conforming to the religious norms of
our community, to speak of a derekh does mean that the norms are used to
pursue a "path".) Worse, Rava tells us that a person who is fully engaged
with the tools the Torah provides but lost sight of, or never formed,
a vision of what it is he is to build is indeed worse off - poisoned,
or as the Vilna Gaon put it, with a garden overgrown with weeds!
How would this play out communally?
One possible outcome is that we would find a community of very committed,
very observant Jews, but who do not show all the signs of the holiness
the Torah is supposed to bring us to. This could happen if there is
insufficient attention to the entire notion of a goal beyond the halakhah,
so that black letter halakhah - that which can be measured, laid out
in clear obligated or prohibited terms - takes center seat without any
attempt to become the kind of person more capable of fulfilling the full
breadth of its commandments. There would be mixed reports of business
ethics, scandals of respected rabbis committing fiscal crimes, others
unable to control their lust, yet others abusing their power over their
students in other ways.
Another possible outcome is an idealistic community, but one whose ideals
are not Torah derived. In such a community ideals would be taken from
some segment of the surrounding culture, and halakhah would be reduced
to a means of "blessing" goals that we assimilated from the outside,
that at times will resemble the holiness Hashem has readied for us,
and at times will differ.
A third possibility is particular to a community that teaches the need to
engage the world around it, to risk the battle of its challenges in order
to use what's positive in the surrounding society to further our sanctity.
Without a firm eye and a constant striving toward an ideal, the energy
it takes to maintain this delicate balance too easily collapses into a
life of compromise. And so, for too many in this community the negative
elements of modernity are incorporated into their lives, and also for
many strict observance itself suffers.
Do these portraits sound familiar?
The typical Orthodox Jew knows that Hashem is "our Father in heaven" and
yet also that he is the Omnipresent, but never even think of the question
of how He can be described as both remote and also everywhere because we
never realize we hold two different truths on the subject. And we all
know that the goal of Judaism is to cleave to the Creator and we also
know that it's perfecting the "image" of the Divine that is our souls,
and yet few of us even notice that dialectic either. Few of us therefore
end up exploring our own solutions to dealing with these two goals when
they contradict.
When a thinking child asks, as the wicked son does at the seder, "Mah
ha'avodah hazos lakhem - what is this worship, this work, for you?" how
many of us are equipped to give a meaningful answer for ourselves,
never mind to teach to our children or students?
IV
We will most naturally think of a solution in educational terms. But we
are speaking of correcting basic attitudes and values. We repeatedly
produce middos curricula for our schools but without a culture of
refinement already in place, the knowledge will continue to have minimal
impact on the students' responses and decisions. Knowing that yiras
Shamayim, fear and awe of the One in heaven, is of critical importance is
not the same as actually feeling that awe and being driven to express it.
Middos need very experiential programming, with examples that impress on
an emotional level, not a curriculum of information to be conveyed. Even
that must be done carefully, for we are not only trying to impress our
youth with the importance of "chessed projects" to do acts of kindness. We
are trying to produce baalei chessed, people with a passion for sharing,
helping, and connecting to others.
So while school does have a role, camp and youth groups can do more, and
peers, home and role models are indispensable. But providing an atmosphere
from the parents' generation downward presents us with a logical dilemma;
our initial goal was to restore something currently given insufficient
attention by too many of that self-same older generation!
If we cannot provide our children with examples of Jews who use the
Torah in a conscious pursuit of holiness (whichever description of it
best fits their inclinations, interests and abilities), we can at least
provide them with adults who are taking conscious efforts to do so. So
as I see it, the way out of this hole is going to involve both school
and synagogue programming in parallel.
We have to reorient the mindset so that we not only know that Judaism
is a path to becoming more than we were yesterday, but we actually make
that our lifestyle. An Orthodoxy in which it's natural to have spiritual
goals for the year, daily and weekly exploration as to what we can do
to reach those goals. Most of us invest this level of conscious planning
into our jobs and careers, shouldn't at least as much effort be expended
on behalf of our souls?
Programming must simultaneously be provided by the synagogues for parents.
Aside from needing to improve ourselves as adults for our own sake, we
are also powerless to change the culture for the next generation without
providing more role models in the current one. Not only offering classes,
but practical exercises, systems for supporting each other in resolutions
to change, and other hands-on tools must be explored. Fortunately,
Chassidus, the Mussar Movement, as well as the more recent Self-Help
movement in general Western society has each explored this territory
before us and uncovered tools we could be harnessing.
Every other Sunday evening a half-dozen friends and I get together on a
video chat and learn some Alei Shur, by Rav Shelomo Wolbe. The sections
in question are divided into middos (both interpersonal and those
that comprise our relationship with the Creator), and each middah into
sections. A section is around a page, and at the end Rav Wolbe suggests
an exercise. A small exercise, incrementing beyond the last one, slowly
stretching our capability. The central feature is the exercise, not
the learning. We discuss how we did at the opening of the next session,
and perhaps if the problems outweigh the advance, we'll decide to simply
discuss the issues and not move forward.
Between meetings, chavrusah-partners check in with each other daily (or
more) to see how it's going. On the skipped Sunday, give or take a day,
they review the material together. This way, you don't lose momentum
between meetings.
We call this invention an "eVaad", an on-line variant of the ve'adim found
in many Lithuanian yeshivos both within the Mussar movement and others.
But over the next decade live ve'adim could in principle be made as
much an expected function of most synagogues as daf yomi has in the
prior generation.2
More common among people looking for means of sparking inspiration and
growth have been Chassidic modalities, such as the singing minyan, the
kumzitz, the tish or the oneg Shabbos. And I'm sure the list continues.
Much more work needs to be done in this area. Unfortunately I can only
hope to start the conversation, not provide a complete menu of solutions.
V
As I see it, the specific elements of Hashem's Word that we have been
paying insufficient attention to can be spelled out in specific steps:
1- Machashavah - Philosophical Thought: The example I gave earlier of
not realizing that I believe both that Hashem makes Himself available
to us and that He is incomprehensible and remote was to highlight the
fact that few of us have stopped since the basics were given to us in
preschool. We therefore must introduce efforts to develop an approach
to understanding Deity, creation, Divine Justice, Mercy and Providence,
the afterlife, the historical march to the messianic era and the eventual
resurrection. To know what the world is about and our place in it. We
need to add texts like the Kuzari, Moreh Nevuchim, the Ramchal's Derekh
Hashem, Michtav meiEliyahu or the like to our curriculum.
2- Hashkafah - Worldview: That personal philosophy gives us a platform
upon which to build a vision for how we are to live our lives, what our
spiritual aspirations should be. Someone who is more comfortable with
the Transcendent side of the dialectic about G-d isn't someone who should
be viewing his spiritual goals primarily in terms of connecting to Him.
Instead, perhaps that lofty vision of G-d inspires them to better emulate
him. Or to complete His World. Once we identified the building in the
prior step, we can place our ladder on its wall.
3- Hislahavus - Fiery Passion: How can we passionately pursue something
without knowing what it is we should be pursuing? But once we identified
a path to ascend to holiness that plays to our strengths and proclivities,
we can consider what steps to take to internalize those ideals emotionally
and to have the ability to live up to them in the heat of the moment. This
is not educating the brain, but rather inculcating into the heart, and
why there is such a need to explore experiential programming for both
adults and children.3
4- Taamei Hamitzos - Meanings or lessons that can be gleaned from the
mitzvos: Torah-based spirituality cannot be a set of practices that
stand apart from the actual mandatory observance. Building a meaningful
Judaism can't involve two separate worlds - one of following the Shulchan
Arukh and the other of spiritual practices, kumzitzen, mussar groups,
or the like. The tools Hashem gave us or taught the Jewish People how
to craft through the halakhic process have to be the most effective ones
for building the palace that is our life's goal.
With such work and changes, our worship of Hashem can be enhanced in at
least three ways:
First, at the moment when temptation strikes, we will possess the tools to
make the right decision. Without working on one's middos, the observance
of the "duties of the limbs" will always remain imperfect. Even our
basic observance cannot stand if it is all we pursue.
Second, there are also the "Chovos haLvavos - Duties of the Heart," as
Rabbeinu Bachya named his text, or as the Rambam put it, "Hilkhos Dei'os
- the Laws of Attitudes". Refining one's ethics, i.e. controlling one's
temper, curbing desires for sex, power, control over others, and other
destructive urges, is itself among the 613 mitzvos. This is embodied in,
"[fix Hebrew] - And you will do the good and the honest in the eyes of
G-d," (Devarim 6:18), and "[fix Hebrew] - You shall be holy, for I am
Holy," (Vayikra 19:2), "[fix Hebrew] - You shall love your neighbor as
yourself," (ibid v. 18), and "[fix Hebrew] - You shall love Hashem your
G-d with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your resources,"
(Devarim 6:5), and is indeed the central theme of the narratives of
Bereishis the majority of Nakh.
Last, working to become a refined and holy person is the entire goal of
the Torah. Hashem introduces His covenant with Abraham by telling him to
"walk yourself before Me and be whole," (Bereishis 17:1). Thus, perfecting
one's ability to relate to Hashem and to other people is the goal of the
entire observance, not merely a means to fulfill other mitzvos and doing
mitzvos themselves. Hashem handed us tools, let's study the blueprint
and the work materials and build.
Each of us start with ourselves, in a small, doable and realistic way.
Look for one thing you'd like to do differently and work on it. Seek
out like-minded individuals, and rely on each other for support. Discuss
this topic with your children. Explain why it's important.
And most of all, grow!
---
Shabbatonim by nit-picking over details of word choices as though
I thought the song was intended to be a philosophical treatise. I
do realize the primary goal was rhyming scheme and singability,
not precision. I am just using these lines illustratively.
2. If your shul or another group would like to get a va'ad started, we at
The AishDas Society would be honored to offer guidance or otherwise
help. Contact us at <i...@aishdas.org>.
3. The entire concept of dialectic is an engine. To say a problem has a
dialectical nature means that we acknowledge the truth of two very
different perspectives, that we find the "answer" to a question more
in grappling with the conflict and developing a "dialog" with the
ideas than in any final resolution. Grappling with the questions of
why we are here and what we should do about it can itself generate
a passion for living a more meaningful life, one that is focused
on growth.
Go to top.
Message: 3
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2014 15:31:27 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] "Binfol oyivcha" does not apply to goyim
On 9/01/2014 3:02 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> The Pesiqta deRav Kahane (Mandelbaum Edition, siman 29, 189a) says the
> reason for half Hallel on the last day of Pesach is because "maasei
> Yadei tov'im bayam, ve'atim omerim shirah". This is also in the Medrash
> Harininu (which admittedly I hadn't heard of before) and the Yalqut
> Shim'oni (the Perishah points you to Parashas Emor, remez 566).
And see the Chavot Yair, who explains this medrash away, while noting that
he only bothers to do so because it is a medrash, so it deserves to be
addressed, but the ikar is not like this at all. But even taking this
medrash into account, he says it only applies in the unique context of hallel.
I only looked up this CY in the first place, because in a previous iteration
you claimed that he supported your position, when in fact he does the opposite.
--
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
Go to top.
Message: 4
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2014 16:38:22 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Why NOT to say Parshas Ha'mon
On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 03:54:38PM -0500, Prof. Levine wrote:
> At 01:43 PM 1/9/2014, Micha Berger wrote:
>> (Tangent, off topic: "Hocus pocus" is a Protestant term, teasing the
>> Catholics for their idea of how the wine-and-wafer thing works. The
>> Latin service begins, "hoc est corpus", declaring the wafer to actually
>> be some guy's body.
>> (OTOH, "abracadabra" is likely slurred or Anglicized Aramaic for "I will
>> create according to the word -- ebra kedibra".)
>
> From http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hocus-pocus
Which doesn't contain etymologies, so doesn't address either of my
asides.
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
Go to top.
Message: 5
From: "Prof. Levine" <llev...@stevens.edu>
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2014 14:44:29 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Why NOT to say Parshas Ha'mon
At 02:38 PM 1/9/2014, Micha Berger wrote:
>I knew R. Miller well for over 30 years...
> > I am pretty sure he would dismiss
> > what you write above also.
>
>You did not yet give any grounds for that certainty.
Yes, I did. I said I knew him well and based on my interactions with
him I am *pretty* sure how he would react. You turned it into "that
certainty."
>You said he didn't like "hocus pocus" or forcing people into believing
>things beyond the necessary for Judaism. The idea of having a minhag to
>say a special tefillah, or even to make a once-a-year occasion so as to
>foster more kavanah when saying it, does not meet those criteria.
>
>I find the idea of dismissing someone else's minhag because it was
>subsequently turned into theurgy as wrong as the original turning it
>into theurgy.
Again, please listen to Rabbi Pruzansky's talk. YL
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20140109/5f4d7e07/attachment-0001.htm>
Go to top.
Message: 6
From: Lisa Liel <l...@starways.net>
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2014 14:50:21 -0600
Subject: Re: [Avodah] "Binfol oyivcha" does not apply to goyim
On 1/9/2014 2:02 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> The Pesiqta deRav Kahane (Mandelbaum Edition, siman 29, 189a) says the
> reason for half Hallel on the last day of Pesach is because "maasei
> Yadei tov'im bayam, ve'atim omerim shirah". This is also in the Medrash
> Harininu (which admittedly I hadn't heard of before) and the Yalqut
> Shim'oni (the Perishah points you to Parashas Emor, remez 566).
No offense, but I'm only replying to this for the benefit of those who
may not have been here for the previous rounds. You've already been
told that your interpretation of the Pesiqta requires a major machloket
Chazal which not a single Rishon seems to have noticed. Yes, Hashem's
creations were drowning in the sea. So He silenced the melachim, which
are only part of Him, but as the Gemara says, He was absolutely fine
with us singing shira. We say Half Hallel on the last day of Pesach
because there are two parts of Hallel which condemn Hashem's creations,
and saying those parts on the anniversary of Hashem having to destroy
His own creations would be bad middot.
Imagine: "Hashem, I know Your creatures are drowning in the sea, but
I'm going to condemn Your creatures ('kol ha-adam koseiv') and curse
Your creatures ('k'mohem yihiyu oseihem, kol asher boteiach bahem').
Would you do that to a melech basar v'dam? A king is forced to execute
his son, and while it's happening, his courtiers are bad-mouthing his
children to him?
Have you ever asked yourself why it's those two sections in particular
that we omit in Half Hallel? What they have in common that isn't the
same as the rest of Hallel?
The Gemara says that we don't rejoice over the fall of a Jewish foe.
Because fellow Jews are a part of us in a way that goyim are not. But for
Hashem, the Mitzrim were His just as much as we are. His silencing the
malachim was akin, metaphorically, to us not rejoicing over the fall of a
fellow Jew. That's the connection between binfol oyivcha and the midrash.
>: Nor is your citation of the views of an Achron (the Pnei Moshe, who
>: lived in the 1700s) on the question a contradiction. We're all very
>: well aware that there are Achronim who share your view on this subject.
> Actually, the claim was that the idea in question was a non-O borrowing
> of Xian ethic. So I don't know if "we're all very aware". Maybe now.
No, I'm pretty sure we were all very aware. The difference is that some
of us are also aware that Christian concepts have been known to leak
into even the most kosher (otherwise) of sources. See the discussion
we had a while ago on a prophet in his own city. Lisa
Go to top.
Message: 7
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2014 14:37:58 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Why NOT to say Parshas Ha'mon
On 9/01/2014 2:16 PM, Prof. Levine wrote:
>
> I knew R. Miller well for over 30 years. I heard him say more than
> once, "We are not mechuyav to believe everything that is written in a
> sefer, even in a choshava sefer." I am pretty sure he would dismiss
> what you write above also.
Then we are certainly not mechuyav to accept everything that is said by a rov,
even a choshuver rov, especially when it contradicts what is written by a
rishon or an acharon.
--
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
Go to top.
Message: 8
From: Ben Waxman <ben1...@zahav.net.il>
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2014 21:44:19 +0200
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Why NOT to say Parshas Ha'mon
Are you stating that according to Rav Miller the GRA did NOT know kabbalah?
Ben
On 1/9/2014 9:16 PM, Prof. Levine wrote:
>
>
> I once discussed with him R. Chaim Volozhin's "proof" that the GRA
> knew Kabbala well which he writes about in his introduction to the
> GRA's perush on Saffra D'tzeniusa. He waved this away also.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20140109/27d7e0a4/attachment-0001.htm>
Go to top.
Message: 9
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2014 17:02:18 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] "Binfol oyivcha" does not apply to goyim
On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 02:50:21PM -0600, Lisa Liel wrote:
: No offense, but I'm only replying to this for the benefit of those who
: may not have been here for the previous rounds. You've already been
: told that your interpretation of the Pesiqta requires a major machloket
: Chazal which not a single Rishon seems to have noticed...
Because, perhaps as per R' Yaakov, there is no real machloqes, major or
not. The gemara accepts "maasei yadai" as the reason for 1/2 Hallel on
day 7. The medrash posits it as the reason for day 7. The gemara, though,
continues and demands a different explanation for days 2-6.
Second, your mysterious silence would still be a problem just given
the gemaros in Sanhedrin (39b, and Y-mi 43b) that caused me to reopen
the question. Which stands in more blatant contrast to Berakhos 9b-10b,
where David haMelekh does sing shirah over vanquished enemies. Mah
bein David haMelekh and Yehoshafat's muting of the joy?
It IS indeed discussed. The Zohar (who even the skeptic will say was at
least the hand of a rishon) discusses it in Noach 61b. David's enemies
consciously refused every last opportunity for teshuvah, so their
downfall was the only way to get rid of their evil, and thus a cause of
shirah. Yehoshafat's enemies had to be eliminated (nefilas resha'im)
they exhausted the possibility of dropping the evil through teshuvah
(aveidas reshaim -- the Ymi's language), and that is lamentable.
...
: The Gemara says that we don't rejoice over the fall of a Jewish foe.
Actually, as I said, non-Jewish too. You're ignoring the sources that
motivated my posting!
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger The thought of happiness that comes from outside
mi...@aishdas.org the person, brings him sadness. But realizing
http://www.aishdas.org the value of one's will and the freedom brought
Fax: (270) 514-1507 by uplifting its, brings great joy. - R' Kook
Go to top.
Message: 10
From: T6...@aol.com
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2014 16:01:46 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Why NOT to say Parshas Ha'mon
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
.
>>I don't. I think it's because we've seen how minhag after minhag
and I dare say halakhah after halakhah is turned into a mechanistic
means of getting what you want. Narcisistic religion. Magical
thinking. Lechishah. The pursuit of segulah threatens to overwhelm the
pursuit of Avodas Hashem. It creates a desire to push the line back.<<
--
Micha Berger
mi...@aishdas.org
>>>>
My father called it "push-button Judaism."
He objected to this approach for a number of reasons. One is that if you
teach a BT (or FFB for that matter) that pushing button X yields result Y --
and it doesn't work -- it can lead to disillusionment with the whole
religion.
However, there is a gray area between magic and avodas Hashem. For
example, a segulah for having children is to ask your own parents for mechilla
for anything you may have done against their kovod. This isn't so much a
magical formula as a way of correcting a real spiritual blockage that may be
the reason you haven't had children until now. I also remember a case where
a woman who had repeated miscarriages asked my father what to do, and he
advised her to start covering her hair. She did, and it "worked."
Obviously, doing teshuva or improving your mitzva performance is not exactly a
magical segulah, but it can't hurt and it can only help, if you want Hashem to
answer your tefillos.
--Toby Katz
..
=============
-------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20140109/7e5f6ae4/attachment.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 32, Issue 5
*************************************
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.)