Volume 34: Number 31
Mon, 14 Mar 2016
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Message: 1
From: Simon Montagu
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2016 22:41:17 -0800
Subject: Re: [Avodah] malchei yisrael
On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 4:14 PM, saul newman via Avodah
<avo...@lists.aishdas.org> wrote:
> please explain the halachic basis to allow breaking away from the kingship
> of a scion of david melech yisrael...
Hora'at sha`a from a navi.
Go to top.
Message: 2
From: Lisa Liel
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 13:32:19 +0200
Subject: Re: [Avodah] ___melech, ____malach
On 3/10/2016 12:19 AM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 09, 2016 at 12:45:44PM -0800, saul newman via Avodah wrote:
> : 2] if any other answer is inserted , is the result kefira?
>
> For Jews, Yes. Shituf is not a violation of Beris Noach.
>
This would not be shituf.
Lisa
Go to top.
Message: 3
From: Lisa Liel
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 13:33:48 +0200
Subject: Re: [Avodah] malchei yisrael
The only person who ever did that was Yeravam.
On 3/10/2016 2:14 AM, saul newman via Avodah wrote:
> please explain the halachic basis to allow breaking away from the
> kingship of a scion of david melech yisrael...
>
Go to top.
Message: 4
From: Micha Berger
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 10:27:14 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] malchei yisrael
On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 10:41pm PST, R Simon Montagu wrote:
: On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 4:14 PM, saul newman wrote:
:> please explain the halachic basis to allow breaking away from the kingship
:> of a scion of david melech yisrael...
: Hora'at sha`a from a navi.
On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 01:33:48PM +0200, Lisa Liel via Avodah wrote:
: The only person who ever did that was Yeravam.
Tangential but inevitable question, asked it more than once when learning
Melachim A: Given who Yeravam was and what he did to the religion of
Malkhus Yisrael, why did he get a navi (Rashi 13:1 repeats Chazal's
shito that it was Edo) giving that hora'as sha'ah?
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger Good decisions come from experience;
mi...@aishdas.org Experience comes from bad decisions.
http://www.aishdas.org - Djoha, from a Sepharadi fable
Fax: (270) 514-1507
Go to top.
Message: 5
From: Eli Turkel
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 10:11:46 -0500
Subject: [Avodah] travel on shabbat
from an article on the history of Jewish Venice (NYT)
Since travel by gondola was deemed permissible on the Sabbath, the
observant had no trouble floating back each week to pray at the scuola of
their choice.
Is this agreed by everyone?
--
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-a
ishdas.org/attachments/20160310/eba6d078/attachment.html>
Go to top.
Message: 6
From: Isaac Balbin
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 20:21:22 +1100
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Moshiach Ben Yosef
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 09:10:13 -0500
From: Zev Sero via Avodah <avo...@lists.aishdas.org>
>> Pshat in the Rambam is (and I never noticed this before) that he is
>> already a melech, and then we enter into the question of whether he
>> has chezkas moshiach. Which, I think, makes it possible to strengthen
>> RIB?s question, namely, what specific practical difference does it
>> make that an individual is b?chezkas moshiach, over and above all the
>> authorities he already has as a melech?
> Perhaps that he is the king of Israel, but we are not there, so he's not
> necessarily *our* king.
This is a Childdush, I have never heard such a Svora based on a Moshiach
Medrash or Ma'amar Chazal. Using the Rambam, one would think that the
people supported Bar Kochba especially after Rabbi Akiva identified
him as Chezkas Moshiach because he was exactly like a King---a warrior
with clout. Could you imagine some Nebach claiming to be a King and
then we thinking he could continue with the steps of the Chazoko to
do the rest? How many steps do you have to do in fact to attain the
Chazoko? All? If so, it's death or failure that removes the potential.
Does Chazaka in that Rambam have its standard meaning or is it perhaps
a looser term for someone who POTENTIALLY appears to be on the path to
doing what's required to be Moshiach but loses that potential status if
they don't achieve it.
Interestingly, the Gemora in Sanhedrin 92a says
Three come when we are unaware (not focussed on them) The Moshiach,
a found article (Yiush) and a Scorpion.
How that Gemora fits into the Rambam's Ikkarim is very interesting,
and I think it can if we follow Rav Y.H. Henkin's Tshuva in Bnei Bonim 3
Ma'amar 3, it is understood. He doesn't contend that we believe is that he
will come every day, but rather that every day we believe he can come. A
subtle but significant difference which he backs up. I'm aware others
think differently, e.g. http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pagefeed/hebrewbooks
org 50622 156.pdf
In fact, if you look at the words of the Rambam he says Achacke Lo B'Chol
Yom Sheyavo. He doesn't say Achake lo Sheyavo Bchol Yom. V'dok.
> If we are to assume he's melech hamoshiach then
> he's the king of all the Jews.
> Or perhaps even if we're living in EY,
> who says we have to recognise him as our king?
> Perhaps until he has shown
> some sign of being for real we can ignore his *claims* of kingship, much as
> we ignore crazy people who claim to be all sorts of things, but once it
> appears that he is the real deal we must submit to him.
So if that's the case, why not make him formally King once he has DONE
all those things. One must say that it's BECAUSE he's King-like at least
and that he's able to force all sorts of outcomes on Jews and non Jews
through war and politics and Siyata Dishmaya and heavenly selection.
What is the practical value of the Chazoko? It seems to be a definition
of steps.
Go to top.
Message: 7
From: Micha Berger
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 11:37:24 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] ___melech, ____malach
On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 01:32:19PM +0200, Lisa Liel via Avodah wrote:
: On 3/10/2016 12:19 AM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote:
: >On Wed, Mar 09, 2016 at 12:45:44PM -0800, saul newman via Avodah wrote:
: >: 2] if any other answer is inserted , is the result kefira?
: >For Jews, Yes. Shituf is not a violation of Beris Noach.
: This would not be shituf.
You are right, I can't keep the translation of the words straight in
my head separate from the obvious implication of using that particular
pseudo-pasuq. It is not natural to assume they are talking about a king
who would never die. (Or if you fell in the blank with "Beis David",
a never-ending dynasty.)
Or, maybe fill in the blank with "Beis David", which isn't ruling right now,
but has ruled and will rule. I certainly wouldn't be heresy to say they
Also, to give context, the Avodah discussion was launched in response to
an off-list email send to about 2 dozen people or so. I think people were
afraid the mod would reject their message if context were included. I
am pretty sure the mod will let my own post through, so...
The case that launched the conversation was one we believe was about
Tzfatim, extreme messianists who self-identify with Lub but the vast
majority of Lub -- even of Lub messianists -- disown.
On the wall of a matzah bakery were banners with Yechi and "HaRebbe
Melekh..." on them, along with a another line.
And that context too colors my perception of the question beyond the
generic way the question was asked. I was really repeating what I said
off-list: that saying their rebbe rules, ruled and will rule / is king,
was king, will always be king le'olam va'ed was indeed meant as
shituf.
And last, "le'olam va'ed" implies lema'alah min hazman. We use ledor
vadaor when we mean "for the rest of history". E.g. "... umemshaltekha
bekhol dor vador", in contrast to "malkhusekha malkhus kol olamim".
That too colored my answer.
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger Worrying is like a rocking chair:
mi...@aishdas.org it gives you something to do for a while,
http://www.aishdas.org but in the end it gets you nowhere.
Fax: (270) 514-1507
Go to top.
Message: 8
From: saul newman
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 07:37:58 -0800
Subject: Re: [Avodah] malchei yisrael
On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 8:35 PM, Zev Sero <z...@sero.name> wrote:
>> please explain the halachic basis to allow breaking away from the
>> kingship of a scion of david melech yisrael...
> Well, for one thing they had a navi's endorsement. But more generally,
> it's the right of any nation to choose a king of their own liking.
> A king's legitimacy ultimately stems from the people's recognition, and
> if they stop recognising him then he's no longer their king. Ein melech
> belo `am....
the only answer acceptable is the Navi's endorsement [ though i can't
fathom why RBSO would affirm direct contravention of his Biblically
mandated precept of a Yehuda-based Malchus. I don't see where rZS's
gentile principle of the people deciding should hold any sway, anymore
than if they decide to move shabbat to tuesday. There is no hetter for
a non-Davidic line scion. on that basis alone the people were wrong. I
suppose they could have murdered the king to get another Judean sibling,
but Partition of the patrimony was not lechatchila an option. Why Hashem
sanctioned it is another question. Especially since He knew that their
punishment would be banishment from Nation Israel until almost the end
of time....
Go to top.
Message: 9
From: Zev Sero
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 10:43:59 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] malchei yisrael
On 03/10/2016 06:33 AM, Lisa Liel via Avodah wrote:
> On 3/10/2016 2:14 AM, saul newman via Avodah wrote:
>> please explain the halachic basis to allow breaking away from the
>> kingship of a scion of david melech yisrael...
> The only person who ever did that was Yeravam.
Yeravam didn't do it, the people did. When they renounced Rechav`am's
rule they didn't even know Yerov`am was available. Only after they were
already independent and looking for a king did they summon Yerov`am and
offer him the job.
On 03/10/2016 10:27 AM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote:
> Tangential but inevitable question, asked it more than once when learning
> Melachim A: Given who Yeravam was and what he did to the religion of
> Malkhus Yisrael, why did he get a navi (Rashi 13:1 repeats Chazal's
> shito that it was Edo) giving that hora'as sha'ah?
He had great potential. He could have been someone special. Even
after he sinned, Hashem made him an incredible offer: if he would only
return, he would not only be forgiven but would be elevated to the
greatest status: he would stroll in Gan Eden with Hashem and David!
He turned it down, but the fact that this offer was made shows how great
he was. If only he hadn't turned to sin the Northern Kingdom would have
been a wonderful and holy place.
On 03/10/2016 10:37 AM, saul newman wrote:
> I don't see where rZS' s gentile principle of the people deciding
> should hold any sway , anymore than if they decide to move shabbat to
> tuesday. There is no hetter for a non-Davidic line scion .
Where did you get that idea? That a king's legitimacy derives entirely
from the people's recognition is not a gentile concept, it's halacha
pesuka. The difference between a king and a bandit is public recognition,
as determined by whether his coinage circulates. If people accept his
coinage it shows that whether they like him or not they recognise him as
a legitimate king; if they turn it down it shows that they regard him as
a mere bandit, so that's what he is.
Again, that is why we made such a big deal of accepting Hashem's
sovereignty every Rosh Hashana. Because if we don't recognise Him as
our king then He isn't. By definition He can't impose it on us.
And that's why only the future will He be "melech `al kol ha'aretz".
--
Zev Sero All around myself I will wave the green willow
z...@sero.name The myrtle and the palm and the citron for a week
And if anyone should ask me the reason why I'm doing that
I'll say "It's a Jewish thing; if you have a few minutes
I'll explain it to you".
Go to top.
Message: 10
From: Zev Sero
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 13:30:06 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] travel on shabbat
On 03/10/2016 10:11 AM, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote:
> from an article on the history of Jewish Venice (NYT)
> Since travel by gondola was deemed permissible on the Sabbath, the
> observant had no trouble floating back each week to pray at the
> scuola of their choice.
> Is this agreed by everyone?
No, it is not.
The origin of the heter seems to be from Rabbenu Yeshaya (the Tosfos RID).
The earliest source seems to be the Shibolei Haleket, who writes that
Rabbenu Yeshaya used to use the Venetian ferries, on the basis that the
ferryman is working for himself, but that R Meir (of Rothenburg) objected.
The Binyamin Zev (who lived in Venice for a while, and whose reliability
as a posek is *very* controversial) discusses this at some length.
The Agur cites the Shibolei Haleket, and the Bet Yosef cites the Agur,
but points out that according to the RI there is no possible heter.
In the early 17th century R Simcha Luzzatto, who was a rav in Venice,
wrote a teshuvah showing why it should be permitted, but his colleagues
voted against it on the grounds that one may not permit something that
the public regards as forbidden.
Sources:
Shibolei Haleket
http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=44342&;pgnum=28
Agur
http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=8894&;pgnum=36
Binyamin Z'ev
http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=44865&;pgnum=25
Bet Yosef (dh Katav Hamordechai)
http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14268&;pgnum=105
Pachad Yitzchak
http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=20179&;pgnum=121
PS: And now you know where my morning went...
--
Zev Sero All around myself I will wave the green willow
z...@sero.name The myrtle and the palm and the citron for a week
And if anyone should ask me the reason why I'm doing that
I'll say "It's a Jewish thing; if you have a few minutes
I'll explain it to you".
Go to top.
Message: 11
From: Prof. Levine
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2016 19:18:15 -0400
Subject: [Avodah] Proposal for Transforming the Bar Mitzvah -- By
A Modest Proposal for Transforming the Bar Mitzvah
By Yosef Adler and Yossi Prager
In Jewish Action -- Winter 5766-2005
<http://ou.org.s3.amazonaws.com/pdf/ja/5766/winter66/ModestProposal.pdf>
There is no halachic requirement that reaching the age of mitzvot be
accompanied by Torah reading. In many Chareidi communities today most
Bar Mitzvah boys read only maftir and the haftarah. Both basic halachah
and the practice of these communities demonstrate that we are not bound
by our current Bar Mitzvah approach. In fact, current thinking about
Jewish education virtually demands that we make a change.
See the article referred to above at the URL given above.
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Avodah mailing list
Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
http://www.aishdas.org/avodah
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
------------------------------
**************************************
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.)