Avodah Mailing List

Volume 34: Number 59

Sat, 21 May 2016

• 1. Re: how to fix a mamzer (Adar Jacob)
• 2. Re: meat and fish (Zev Sero)
• 3. how to fix a mamzer (Eli Turkel)
• 4. Death (Lawrence Levine)
• 5. Re: how to fix a mamzer (Zev Sero)
• 6. Re: how to fix a mamzer (Saul Mashbaum)
• 7. how to fix a mamzer (Eli Turkel)
• 8. Re: how to fix a mamzer (Zev Sero)
• 9. Re: how to fix a mamzer (Allan Engel)
• 10. rights of adopted parents (Eli Turkel)

As I recall, maybe about 20 years ago, talmiday hachamim were bruiting
it about that we should NOT check individuals but assume botel b'rov
for immigrants to Israel or any group of Jews.

On 05/18/2016 01:01 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote:
> The CS suggests explanations for the Rambam, including
>
> 1- The gemara was only concerned about a specific breed of fish which
> we don't eat anymore.

Or perhaps we (i.e. middle Europeans) *do* eat this species but the Rambam
(in Egypt) didn't and was unaware of it.  I know the two Aris have identified
it as a species that exists only in the Euphrates, and thus is eaten only
in Turkey and Iraq, but that's not information the CS could have had.  It
could just as easily have been a species that also lives in the Danube, but
not in the Nile or the Mediterranean.

-- 
Zev Sero               Meaningless combinations of words do not acquire
z...@sero.name          meaning merely by appending them to the two other
                        words `God can'.  Nonsense remains nonsense, even
                        when we talk it about God.   -- C S Lewis

In continuation of the topic of kibud av ve-em

from yevamot 22b that there is ni issur to curse a wicked father
rambam hilchot mamrim explains that this applies only the punishment
the Tur disagrees and says that one must honor a wicked father only if he
does teshuva
others distinguish and say that one must honor a wicked father only while
he is alive

see YD 240 where it is a disagreement between the mechaber and Ramah. The
Ramah paskens like the Tur, Mordechai, Rabbenu Tam and Haghaos Mordechai
that one need honor a wicked father only if he does teshuva

R Zilberstein brings the Zecher Shlomo (Lech Lecha) and the Chida (Devash
Le-phi 1:39) that therefore Avraham owed no honor to his father Terach once
Terach handed him over to Nimrod.

R Zilberstein further brought the Maharam Shick that one who is involved
(metapel) in a mitzvah is the owner of the mitzvah and whoever works and
establishes a mitzvah is the one to make the arrangements. Thus the one who
actively rears the child is the "owner" of the child and gets to make the
decisions and not the biological parent who is not around.

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20160519/d20f2534/attachment-0001.htm>

The following is from RSRH's commentary on Vayikra 21:5


They shall not make a bald spot on their head, nor shall they shaveoff the corners of their beard and they shall not make a wound in  their flesh.


Heathenism, both ancient and modern, tends to associate religion
with death. The kingdom of God begins only where man ends. Death
and dying are the main manifestations of divinity. For, in the heathen
view, the deity is a god of death, not of life; a god who kills and never
revives, who sends death and its harbingers - sickness and poverty -
so that men, mindful of his power and their own helplessness, should
fear him. For this reason heathen temples stand beside graves, and the
foremost place of heathen priests is beside a corpse. There, where the
eyes are dimmed and the heart is broken, they find fertile soil for the
dissemination of their religion. He who bears on his flesh a mark of
death - a symbol of death's power to conquer all - and thus remains
ever mindful of death, performs the religious act par excellence, and this
especially befits a priest and his office.


Not so are the priests in Judaism, because not so is the Jewish concept
of God and not so is the Jewish religion. God, Who instructs the
Kohein regarding his position in Israel, is a God of life. The most exalted
manifestation of God is not in the power of death, which crushes
strength and life. Rather, God reveals Himself in the liberating and
vitalizing power of life, which elevates man to free will and eternal life.
Judaism teaches us not how to die but how to live, so that even in life
we may overcome death, an unfree existence, enslavement to physical
things, and moral weakness. Judaism teaches us how to live every moment
of earthly life as a moment of eternal life in the service of God;
how thus to live every moment of a life marked by moral freedom, a
life of thought and will, creativity and achievement, and also pleasure.
This is the teaching to which God has dedicated His Sanctuary and for
whose service He has consecrated the Kohanim, who teach the people the
"basis and direction of life"


__________________________________________________________________


Based on this may one conclude that the present day obsession with death that one finds in some Islamic circles is a reversion to heathenism?  YL

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20160519/b102c953/attachment-0001.htm>

On 05/19/2016 04:26 AM, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote:
> In the shiur of R Zilberstein last night he discussed the situation
> of a parent (usually father) who deserts a child in the hospital or
> even leaves the family.

> One case involved a father who showed up before the daughter's
> marriage and insisted that his name appear on the wedding invitation.
> R. Zilberstein paskened that the father who abandoned the family has
> absolutely no rights to anything. If the mother remarried then the
> adoptive father has the right to all decisions. Kibud Av ve-Em
> applies to the adoptive father and not the biological father that
> abandoned the family. Hakarot hatov is for the help of the adoptive
> family and biology contributes nothing.

Sorry, this is contrary to halacha. Kibbud av va'em is not connected to
hakarat hatov; it's a duty that one owes to ones parents *regardless* of
whether they did one good or bad. Even a mamzer owes his parents kibud,
although they did him the worst evil. Even Avraham Avinu, whose father
handed him over to be burned, owed him kibbud av.

An adoptive "parent" is only owed hakarat hatov (and kevod rabbo if he
taught him torah) and therefore is only owed it if he actually did good
and not bad. An abusive adoptive parent is owed nothing.

This is not subject to any machlokes, thus there is no room for different
opinions. Someone who says otherwise is simply wrong.


I found an answer to my speculation that a Jew's child by a shifcha might
be considered his child.   It's not so.  An eved has no yichus at all, not
even to his mother(!) let alone his father.


-- 
Zev Sero               Meaningless combinations of words do not acquire
z...@sero.name          meaning merely by appending them to the two other
                        words `God can'.  Nonsense remains nonsense, even
                        when we talk it about God.   -- C S Lewis

RET:
> Not necessarily. yichus refers to marriage. It might have nothing to
> do with mitzvot like honoring one's parents and other connections
> between parents and child

RZS:
> What are you talking about?  What does yichus have to do with marriage?
> Yichus means genealogy, i.e. who is whose child.  Nothing more or less.

Yichus may of course have different meanings in different contexts.

The first mishna in the fourth perek of Kiddushin, Asara Yuchasin, very
strongly connects yichus to marriage. The mishna lists ten halachic
categories of personal status (my translation of "yichus") , and then
immediately details the connection of these statuses to the permissibility
of marriage Indeed it is clear that according to this mishna, a *very
fundamental implication* of yichus is whom can one marry halachically,
Putting this more strongly it seems that the mishna is defining ten
halachic "marriageability" categories (yuchasin), making marriageability
a *defining characteristic* of yichus. This is most likely what RET had
in mind.
In the framework of this mishna, RZS' statement "What does yichus have
to do with marriage?Yichus means genealogy, i.e. who is whose child.
Nothing more or less." is untenable.Yichus defines whom you can marry.

When the gemara states "bno min min hashifcha umin hanachrit u eino
mityaches acharav" it is saying, as we know, that halachically the child
of a male Jew and a female slave or a non-Jewish woman is not his child;
there is no genealogical connection ("yichus") between them. This is
the sense of yichus that RZS apparently favors, but is a meaning of
yichus very different from that in the above cited mishna.

Saul Mashbaum

I am bringing in more detail the story told by R Zilberstein. He gives out
notes before the shiur and so this is all in print if anyone is interested

A man divorced his wife after a nasty settlement without leaving any
mezonot for the wife or their daughter. Later the woman married again and
had a new happy family and the new husband raised the daughter from the
first marriage supplying all her needs while the biological father had no
contact with his daughter

A few days before the daughter's marriage the father shows up holding an
invitation upset that the adoptive father is listed as the father of the
kallah and the biological father isn't mentioned at all.
He screamed is the husband of your mother really your father?
Though he had no contact with his daughter he described the shame he had
with his friends and demanded that they print a new invitation with himself
listed as the father of the bride

The daughter came to R Zilberstein asking what to do. He answered that the
mitzvah of kibud av ve-em is a great mitzvah but it doesn't allow for lies.
Since the one listed as the father of the bride is the one who brought her
up and did everything for her including all expenses and he supplies the
dowry and the rest of the wedding expenses he thus considered the father of
the bride. Since the biological father abandoned the daughter he has no
right to have his name listed on the invitation.

The daughter returned to her father with the psak of R Zilberstein and the
father remarked that he was willing to pay the expenses of the wedding. The
daughter returned to R. Zilberstein. After consulting with R Nissin
Karelitz they paskened that to be considered the father of the bride he
also needs to participate in buying an apartment.

R Zilberstein noted that in the ketuba is listed the biological father in
order to prevent marriage with relatives. When the biological father is not
alive then one lists the adoptive father but when he is alive the
biological father is listed. He was not sure whether the language should be
"be abuha" or "be nasa" . The first would be a lie since she didn't live
with her father but the second language is used only for an orphaned bride.
His preferred remedy was to leave that phrase out completely.

Again anyone who wants to see the Hebrew original can contact me



-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20160520/d21ae117/attachment-0001.htm>

On 05/20/2016 06:02 AM, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote:
>
> The daughter came to R Zilberstein asking what to do. He answered that
> the mitzvah of kibud av ve-em is a great mitzvah but it doesn't allow for lies.

In other words, her obligation of kibud av va'em is to her real father, not
to the one who raised her, but this obligation doesn't include putting him
on her wedding invitation, for the reason explained later.


> Since the one listed as the father of the bride is the one who brought her
> up and did everything for her including all expenses and he supplies the
> dowry and the rest of the wedding expenses he thus considered the father
> of the bride.

I suspect that this is still a micasting of the original.  I expect that the
original didn't say that he is the *father*, but that he is the host who is
inviting people to the wedding (a role that in *most* cases is played by
the father, but not in this case).


> Since the biological father abandoned the daughter he has no right to
> have his name listed on the invitation.  [...]  the father remarked
> that he was willing to pay the expenses of the wedding. The daughter
> returned to R. Zilberstein. After consulting with R Nissin Karelitz
> they paskened that to be considered the father of the bride he also
> needs to participate in buying an apartment.

Again, the term "to be considered the father" makes no sense here; can
money make someone a father or not a father?!  If he's not the father
how can any amount suddenly make him one, and why are they haggling over
the amount?   Rather the issue here was not at all whether he's the
father.  Of course he is.  The issue here was who is the host who is
making the wedding and inviting people to it.  And that is the person
who is paying, not just for the actual affair, but also the expenses
that enable the affair to happen, i.e. the apartment, without which there
would be no shidduch.

It appears from this psak that if he is willing to pay this the bride and
her adoptive father may not refuse!  And that would be because he is after
all the father, and thus has the *right* to host his daughter's wedding,
if only he is willing to do so.


> R Zilberstein noted that in the ketuba is listed the biological
> father in order to prevent marriage with relatives. When the
> biological father is not alive then one lists the adoptive father but
> when he is alive the biological father is listed.

I'm sure this is misreported; what difference does it make whether the
father is alive or dead, his relatives are the same!  And the fact is
that she is forbidden to his relatives, and *permitted* to her adoptive
father's relatives.  (In fact it used to be common for someone who raised
an orphan to arrange a marrriage for him or her with one of his own children.
I even know of a case nowadays where this happened.)


-- 
Zev Sero               Meaningless combinations of words do not acquire
z...@sero.name          meaning merely by appending them to the two other
                        words `God can'.  Nonsense remains nonsense, even
                        when we talk it about God.   -- C S Lewis

Surely prevention of marriage with (forbidden) relatives is applicable
whether the biological father is or is not alive?

On 20 May 2016 at 11:02, Eli Turkel via Avodah <avo...@lists.aishdas.org>
wrote:

R Zilberstein noted that in the ketuba is listed the biological father in
> order to prevent marriage with relatives. When the biological father is not
> alive then one lists the adoptive father but when he is alive the
> biological father is listed.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20160520/0c2e9dcf/attachment-0001.htm>

see

http://dinonline.org/2015/12/07/adoption-in-halachah/

and especially

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/12721

In a certain sense, the moral obligation of an adopted child is even
greater, since human nature is for parents to care for and raise their
children. But when a couple takes an orphaned or abandoned child and raises
him, their kindness is much greater, and therefore, the duty to be grateful
for this is also greater.

also
http://www.lookstein.org/articles/mourning_adoptive.htm

The relationship the adoptive or step-parents have with the children they
have actually raised has a functional expression among many halakhists:[9]
<http://www.lookstein.org/articles/mourning_adoptive.htm#_ftn9> The
children may be identified when called to the Torah and in formal documents
as the son or daughter of those who raised them, and the normal
restrictions of *yihud* (which generally allows unsupervised and close
contact with only biological parents, siblings and children) is not
applicable to adoptive families, whose members interact as a biological
family would. This is far more than transporting halakhic forms (like not
addressing one?s adoptive parents by their first names) to the adoptive
family.  It is an expression of a new halakhic reality, so to speak.

obviously laws of mourning are different between a biological parent and an
adoptive parent

Rabbi Soloveitchik insisted that there is a *kiyyum* of the mitzvah of
*avelut* even when there is no halakhic obligation to mourn the specific
individual.  He drew this conclusion from the ruling that ?Where there is a
case of a deceased who has left no mourners to be com?forted, ten worthy
men should assemble at his placeall seven days of the mourning period and
the rest of the people should gather about them [to comfort them]. And if
the ten cannot stay on a regular basis, others from the community may
replace them.? It was for this reason that the Rav regularly advised
children to mourn the adopted parents who had raised them.  If there was no
* hiyyuv *[obligation]* ha-mitzvah*, there was none-the-less a *kiyyum
ha-mitzvah*.

BTW a friend of mine told me that there is a psak of R Schacter that if the
parent abused the child and it would be a great stress on the child to
mourn for the parent then he is exempt from sitting shiva



-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20160521/3281c98d/attachment.htm>

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



_______________________________________________
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.)