Avodah Mailing List

Volume 34: Number 86

Tue, 02 Aug 2016

• 1. Praising the Bride (Cantor Wolberg)
• 2. Re: birchat kohanim (Marty Bluke)
• 3. Re: Praising the Bride (Zev Sero)
• 4. Re: Praising the Bride (Micha Berger)
• 5. how do you teach emuna? (saul newman)
• 6. Re: RHS on shabbat - electricity (Micha Berger)
• 7. Re: Rambam omitting sources and Rambam regarding Prophecy (Was: Re: Prophecy) (Micha Berger)
• 8. Re: derabbanan (Micha Berger)
• 9. Re: how do you teach emuna? (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer)
• 10. Re: derabbanan (Zev Sero)
• 11. antidote for baseless hatred (Eli Turkel)
• 12. May I purchase a new car during the Three Weeks? (Professor L. Levine)
• 13. Double Billing (Professor L. Levine)

Along the lines of what Zev writes, Rav Berkovitz shlita told us that
pshat in Beis Hillel is that in the grooms eyes she is surely "na'ah
vachasudah?.

How can you say that when in days of old, the groom didn?t even 
see her bride until the wedding? Sure, it sounds nice to say that
every bride is beautiful. Why not also say that every groom is 
handsome? IMHO this is not reality. Little do we know how many
grooms were quite disappointed with what they saw. They weren?t
marrying the wedding gown.

R' Micha Berger asked What is the issur for a non-kohen to recite bircas
kohanim?

The Gemara is Kesubos 24b states that there is an issur aseh for a
non-kohen to duchen. Rashi explains "Koh t'varchu atem vlo zarim".

On the other hand Tosafos in Shabbos 118b comments on the Gemara about R'
Yosi where he said that he always listened to his friends even to go up and
duchen (even though he wasn't a kohen), that it would seem that there is no
issur for a non-kohen to go up and duchen except for the beracha levatala.

The Charedim explains the Gemara is Kesubos that the issur on the non-kohen
is that he has a mitzva to be blessed by the kohanim so if he goes up he
loses out on that mitzva.

Also see the Rama at the beginning of Siman 128
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20160801/5e5c9f74/attachment-0001.htm>

On 31/07/16 23:15, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote:
> How can you say that when in days of old, the groom didn?t even see his
>  bride until the wedding?  [...]  Little do we know how many grooms were
> quite disappointed with what they saw.

This is precisely why Chazal forbade being mekadesh someone without seeing
her first.  So it isn't true that they didn't know what they were getting.
The typical way a shidduch worked in those days seems to have been that a
young man would see a young girl and be attracted, and would ask his father
to approach the girl's father to negotiate terms.  Or, if he was older, he'd
approach the girl's father himself.  The girl's own preferences would be
consulted only after everything had been tentatively arranged.

For an example of what can happen when a groom doesn't see the bride first,
see the short marriage of Henry VIII and Anne of Cleves.  Which actually
worked out very well for her, since the divorce was amicable and she remained
the king's close friend.

-- 
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

On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 11:15:43PM -- 0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote:
: Along the lines of what Zev writes, Rav Berkovitz shlita told us that
: pshat in Beis Hillel is that in the grooms eyes she is surely "na'ah
: vachasudah".

He probably cited the Maharsha, who explains the gemara that way.

The problem is that one is allowed to mislead (meshaneh es ha'emes) for
peace, but should still avoid actually lying. So the Maharsha explains
how the words could be taken as technically true, even if misleading
at face value.

: How can you say that when in days of old, the groom didn't even 
: see her bride until the wedding?

I don't think that was true of the era in question. Batei Hillel veShammai
was late bayis sheini. This is an era when Tu beAv included guys picking
our their dates from among the girls dancing. Even though I presue most
marriages were not made that way, it still does not speak of an era in
which marriage was expected to be arranged.

(Similarly, a generation later.... Rachel and Aqiva, her father's head
shepherd, fall in love and decide to get married. Kalba Savua does not
react like Tevye the milkman, "They gave each other a pledge? Unheard
of. Absurd!" What only bothers him is that his daughter chose an
ignoramous. A condition Aqiva corrects, thanks to the motivation provided
by his wife.)

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             People were created to be loved.
mi...@aishdas.org        Things were created to be used.
http://www.aishdas.org   The reason why the world is in chaos is that
Fax: (270) 514-1507      things are being loved, people are being used.

r slifkin here

 [
http://www.rationalistjudaism.com/2
016/07/strengthening-emunah-via-denying.html?utm_content=buffer35a29&;utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer
 ]

argues essentially that the teachers of emunah  are using invalid arguments.

is anybody writing / teaching with methods that are not assailable?
or is it that in a hermetically sealed environment these types of arguably
flawed posits are sufficient?
 is it even possible to teach in an irrefutable way , or will there always
be a 'ta shma'  on any type of proofs one tries to bring?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20160801/b89d5ffb/attachment-0001.htm>

On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 12:40:37PM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote:
: RHS felt that electricity in general is prohibited on shabbat only
: derabbanan based on a rabbinic metaken maneh. Hence, he did not see a major
: problem is using a toilet that has an automatic flush or even an automatic
: door. Flushing a toilet or opening a door is allowed. The electricity is
: not doing anything that could not be done manually.

... assuming that causing light without heat is not havarah. Eg the
indicator LEDs one often finds on automatic devices, like that toilet
or door.

On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 09:59:29AM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote:
: American (among others) law requires that all dishwashers operate only
: when the door is closed. This is mainly to prevent injuries by someone
: sticking his hand into the machine while it is operating. It also prevents
: water from exiting while the machine is operating.
: 
: A mechanic could override this mechanism and allow the machine to
: operate while the door is open but would be violating secular law and
: dina demalchusa.
: 
:  From a halachic viewpoint the problem is that closing the door would
: allow the machine to turn on later via a shabbos clock...

Well, assuming the US isn't being crazy, chamira sakanta mei'isua anyway.

(Not to mention dina demalkhusa also being assur, although not in
the same league as avoiding piquach nefesh or shemiras Shabbos.)

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Life isn't about finding yourself
mi...@aishdas.org        Life is about creating yourself.
http://www.aishdas.org                - Bernard Shaw
Fax: (270) 514-1507

On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 09:53:02PM -0400, H Lampel via Avodah wrote:
: The Rambam, in his response to the criticisms of R' Pinchas HaDayan, 
: addressed this issue explicitly...
: In this fascinating letter, he also adds some other considerations:

:> See how explicit it is! -- that it is /improper/ to mention anything but 
:> the finally decided-upon halacha alone, and it was only necessary to 
:> mention opposing opinions during those times that some practiced one 
:> way, and others practiced a different way, when some obtained the law 
:> according to one sage's opinion, and some according to another sage's 
:> opinion...

I am unclear how the Rambam gets this peshat in the mishnah.

Edios 1:4 says the motive for mentioning both shitos in machloqesin
between batei Hillel veShammah is "to teach future generations, so that
a person does not stand on his words. For even the avos holam did not
stand on their words."

To teach middos, that others learn for Beis Shammai's (and occasionally
BH's) example about how to lose a machloqes. Middos without which the
kelalei pesaq wouldn't work.

1:5 goes on to explain other rejected opinion, is particular daas yachid
when there is a rabbim, although it could be other quashed opinions
equally.

And this is because some day, there may be a beis din empowered (gadol
mimenu bechokhmah uveminyan) who may choose the other side.

Speaking even more generally, the AhS makes a point in preserving the
full fuzziness of the law. You don't know when you might need a senif
lehaqail or a din for a seh'as hadechaq, and you need to know the full
field of divrei E-lokim chaim.

The Rambam's desire to avoid that fuzziness derives from his uniquely
Accumulative approach to halakhah. The majority of rishonim believe
that halakhah is Constitutive. IOW, the Rambam believes correct pesaq
is discovered by the poseiq, whereas the doinant position is that it is
invented. To the inventor, other positions are pieces that go into
the contrution. To the discoverer, they are wild geese to chase.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             When memories exceed dreams,
mi...@aishdas.org        The end is near.
http://www.aishdas.org                   - Rav Moshe Sherer
Fax: (270) 514-1507

On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 09:59:57PM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote:
: RMA also pointed out that the Ritva claims that there are two kinds of
: asmachta. One is just a device for memory and is a pure derabbanan. However
: there is a second asmachta which is really hinted at by the pasuk.
: Nevertheless it has a status of a rabbinic law.

: RMA the claims that both the Rambam and Ramban agree to this even though
: they seem to disagree. He the goes another step and says that nevertheless
: they have a disagreement. Rambam holds that chazal are representatives of
: G-d. However the Ramban disagrees as sees chazal as "shiluche didan" and we
: must listen to chazal as a natural extension that we accepted on ourselves

When it comes to qiddush hachodesh, they act as sheluchei didan. Also,
for buying qorbanos tzibbur.

I am also reminded on RSZA's position on electricity (to tie in a
second thread), which appears to be based on the idea that near-universal
agreement of today's posqim, who are not semukhim (in the Sanhedrin sense)
make a gezirah, no less so than Sanhedrin. Which would also imply that
Sanhedrin's power to make taqanos is as sheluchei didan.

But whatever you think of the 2nd paragraph, and RMA needn't sign on to
RSZA's chiddush even if you agree with my take on the Minchas Shelomo,
it remains that the Sanhedrin acts as our shaliach in other contexts.

Which could provide a mechanism for why a taqanah that never catches on
does not become law. After all, zakhin le'adam shelo befanav doesn't work
when the adam objects.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             It's never too late
mi...@aishdas.org        to become the person
http://www.aishdas.org   you might have been.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                      - George Eliot

Reuvain Meir Caplan's comment on Slifkin on FB:

> It's funny how Rabbi Slifkin writes in such a fundamentalist way in 
> lack of nuance, yet criticizes such fundamentalism. He describes the 
> two approaches as being the ONLY approaches available besides his own. 
> I agree that both approaches described are bad, but I also think it is 
> wrong to assume that the third option mentioned is the only other way 
> to go. After all, if a Mormon experience filled someone with religious 
> inspiration/beauty, is Rabbi Slifkin saying one should be Mormon???! 
> (obviously not). I think that a better approach is to actually deal 
> with the issues. If we truly believe that Torah is from HaShem, than 
> there has to be an answer to these problems in either the 
> interpretation of Scientific evidence (or lack thereof), or in 
> understanding the Torah itself (including such things as the idea that 
> Chazal used the science of their day). This is what I was hoping this 
> group could assist in. We need orthodox Jewish scientists who are 
> expert in the field under discussion to be able to objectively say 
> what is a matter of interpretation of results versus indisputable 
> observed fact. Some of (and I emphasize some) the so called 
> "pseudo-science" approaches are not that bad as they show an 
> alternative interpretation of the scientific findings which does not 
> contradict the Torah. No one should ever claim that such arguments 
> "prove" anything, only that they show that the "science" does not 
> dis-prove the Torah. This removes a "barrier of belief" and allows 
> rational modern individuals to be able to approach Torah seriously. If 
> the schools do not have OJ scientists on hand (which they don't) than 
> they should teach these issues a'la RYGB and describe every opinion, 
> why that opinion thinks they are right, where to go to find more info, 
> and who to talk to. No hiding anything and no making things up.

Craig Winchell's comment there:

> I found it tragic that he took 2 laughable books and felt the need to 
> argue against them. He should fight those deserving of the fight. Let 
> those who still have standing fight the good fight against these books 
> and the philosophies behind them. By making it his fight, when he 
> himself has been discredited (improperly or properly), he is 
> guaranteeing that his argument will not be taken seriously among those 
> who have the power to change the Jewish world. As it is, there are 
> plenty who would pooh-pooh these books and those who believe they 
> represent a legitimate view of the world.

My comment there:

> He picked two strawmen and skewered them. Big deal.
> Don Quixote tilting at the windmills.

KT,

YGB



On 8/1/2016 12:32 PM, saul newman via Avodah wrote:
> r slifkin here
>
>  [ 
> http://www.rationalistjud
> aism.com/2016/07/strengthening-emunah-via-denying.html?utm_content=buf
> fer35a29&;utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm
> _campaign=buffer 
>  ]
>
> argues essentially that the teachers of emunah  are using invalid 
> arguments.
>
> is anybody writing / teaching with methods that are not assailable?
> or is it that in a hermetically sealed environment these types of 
> arguably flawed posits are sufficient?
>  is it even possible to teach in an irrefutable way , or will there 
> always be a 'ta shma'  on any type of proofs one tries to bring?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Avodah mailing list
> Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
> http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20160801/4b17fd1e/attachment-0001.htm>

On 01/08/16 16:59, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote:
> Which could provide a mechanism for why a taqanah that never catches on
> does not become law. After all, zakhin le'adam shelo befanav doesn't work
> when the adam objects.

Only when there's a tzad chovah.  Every time we find mentioned that omed
vetzaveach works, we also find an explanation for why he has a legitimate
objection, why he might legitimately not see it as a zechus.   Of course
any gezeira by definition has a tzad chovah.

-- 
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

<<Let me give you an example. Suppose I said about my neighbor, "He isn't
going to be arrested." If he's done nothing criminal, that's certainly
true, but what image is created in the listener's mind? Or how about,
"He's not being charged with wife-beating." Again, this is true, but
the image that he may be beating his wife is false. And that image is
created because the listener is who she is. >>

R Zilberstein in a shiur on doctors giving out information about
prospective kallah/chattan. There are times that the doctor knows
information that would be important for the other side to know but the law
prevents him from revealing information.

R Zilberstein's advice was to say something like "I am not allowed to give
out this information"
exactly to hint that there is something to be looked into further. So
according to Rav Zilberstein there are occasions when one should exactly
say the above quote

(BTW my doctor friends tell me that they are not even allowed to say this
without permission)


-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20160802/cd4d3477/attachment-0001.htm>

From today's OU Halacha Yomis


Q. May I purchase a new car during the Three Weeks?


A. Rav Moshe Feinstein, zt"l discusses this question in Igros Moshe OC 3:80. He distinguishes between three types of vehicles:

1. A car bought for personal use requires a Shehecheyanu and may therefore
not be purchased during the Three Weeks. As discussed in yesterday's
Halacha Yomis, a Shehecheyanu should not be said during the Three Weeks.


2. A car bought for family use requires the beracha of HaTov V'Hameitiv,
since Hashem has shown kindness to the family. This beracha may be recited
during the Three Weeks (Shaarei Teshuva OC 551:18). A car may be purchased
under such circumstances during the Three Weeks until Rosh Chodesh Av. It
may not be purchased during the Nine Days, because it is similar to new
construction, which is prohibited during the Nine Days because it brings
joy.


3. A truck or a small car designated for business use may be purchased
during the entire Three Weeks, since it is needed for work. The beracha of
Shehecheyanu should be postponed until after the conclusion of the Three
Weeks.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20160802/dbc8486a/attachment-0001.htm>

From

http://www.businesshalacha.com/en/article/double-billing


For most regular people, charging clients a few hundred dollars an hour
makes for a very comfortable livelihood. Yet, human nature is such that
regardless of the amount a person earns, he is always looking to increase
his income. For a business owner, there are numerous approaches he can
take, from raising his prices to increasing sales volume to branching out
into different product lines. For a professional whose income is solely
based on billable hours however, there are only two ways to increase his
income. He can either raise his hourly rate, or increase his billable
hours. Raising rates is often difficult, as there are pretty standard rates
for a professional of a given level of experience and competence. That
leaves increasing billable hours. When a professional is first building his
practice, that is very doable. However, a successful attorney will soon
reach a plateau- he is physically capable of working only so many hours per
day. At that point, it would appear that 
 the attorney's income should stagnate.


There are however, a number of creative methods to increase billable hours
without actually working more. However, these approaches raise ethical,
legal, and halachic questions, which are the focus of this article.


See the above URL for much more.  YL

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20160802/227e030f/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.)