Avodah Mailing List

Volume 39: Number 73

Fri, 20 Aug 2021

• 1. Re: HaNaara (Zev Sero)
• 2. Re: Do I need to make sure to write a Pruzbul before Rosh Hashanah? (Micha Berger)
• 3. Re: aseih docheh lo taaseh (Micha Berger)
• 4. Re: Do I need to make sure to write a Pruzbul before Rosh Hashanah? (Zev Sero)
• 5. Re: OU Mini Seedless Cucumbers (Akiva Miller)
• 6. Fwd: Against Hate (Ki Teitse??5781) (Micha Berger)
• 7. Re: Do I need to make sure to write a Pruzbul before Rosh Hashanah? (Micha Berger)

On 16/8/21 6:31 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote:
> I'm caught on the case in Devarim 22:20.
> 
> The case as described 22:13-15 is where the husband makes accusations,
> and the wife's parent prove that she was indeed a virgin when the
> marriage was consummated. And now in v. 20, "but if tne accusation
> was indeed true" she gets seqilah.
> 
> He made an accusation, they fail to bring proof. No mention of eidus,
> hasra'ah, etc...
> 
> How does the gap between TSBK and halakhah gets closed?

TSBP essentially says "chisurei mechsera vehachi katani".   It assumes 
that *of course* he has witnesses who claim to have given hasra'ah, 
because otherwise there is nothing to discuss.  Her not being a virgin 
is not really an issue; she had no obligation to be one.  Before the 
kiddushin she was free to do whatever she liked, and it was none of his 
business.  The most he could claim was a refund on the mohar, and to 
rewrite the kusuba, but that's not what he's demanding.

Specifically, it says that "ve'eileh besulei biti" does *not* refer to 
"bloody sheets" or whatever, but to witnesses who refute the husband's 
witnesses.

-- 
Zev Sero            Wishing everyone a healthy summer
z...@sero.name

On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 07:56:01PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote:
> On 16/8/21 4:42 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote:
>> Like the people who buy 4 amos x 4 amos of land in EY just so that they
>> can get a mitzvah for not working it next year. Of course, you wouldn't
>> have gone to the plot to work it anyway.

> You wouldn't have personally gone, but the other six years the farmer in
> whose field your plot lies does work it on your behalf, together with the
> whole field.  On shemita he doesn't.

Doesn't really touch the broader idea. Are you going to make money
the years the farmer works? What did you give up for shemittah in
particular? Unlike the parting with money of buying a plot in EY, the
shemittah part is really effort free. Like the sekhar one could get for
not stealing something they aren't interested in.

If lefum tzaarah agra, how much berakhah will one get for a mitzvah that
involves no effort or tzaar?

So I still see it more a commitment to yishuv haaretz than to shemittah.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger                 Every child comes with the message
http://www.aishdas.org/asp   that God is not yet discouraged with
Author: Widen Your Tent      humanity.
- https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF                 - Rabindranath Tagore

On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 09:08:00PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote:
> Discussion concerning aseih docheh lo taaseh:

I found it very enlightening when learning the Yerushalmi version of
Lulav haGazul (Sukkah ch. 3).

In the Y-mi (vilna 12a) and midrashim (Vayiqra Rabba, Tanuchma),
the expression instead of "mitzvah haba'ah ba'aveirah" is "shena'aseh
saneigoro qeteigoro".

When lomdus attacks the question of when we say asei dokheh lav and when
mitzvah haba'ah ba'aveirah, one of the proposed solutions is that the
latter refers to a cheftza. So, when I came upon this Y-mi, a little
light bulb went on.

> Me-After listening to a shiur: It is certainly true that if you have a
> +10 for an aseih and a -8 for a lo taaseh, you would net out +2...

Unless the lav makes the whole asei a travesty. Like giving someone a
present bought with money they know you stole from them.

Addition may not be the right metaphor.

> Would you agree that: If I can do something that creates 10 units
> of spiritual good in the world and 8 units of spiritual evil, then the
> world is better off. I would receive only reward for doing such an act.

You are assuming that there is only one spiritual good.

In reality there are many, and sometimes they have many points of conflict
-- like Emes and Shalom.

Even if we assume addition is the right metaphor, maybe you're adding
meat and salad. A person needs a variety of foods and their nutrients
in order to be healthy. Maybe the world has plenty of whatever it is
you created, but not enough of whatever it is you destroyed.

And each person in the universe has their own spiritual "metabolism"
and likely needs different spiritual goods in different quantities.

I think that it is because we cannot know what the world needs, or
what we ourselves need, that the mishnah tells us to be as cautious of
mitzvos qalos as we are of chamuros. Because even though one mitzvah
is a 4 and the other a 10, maybe what the 4 whatevers are is more what
you and your part of Creation needs more than the 10. And therefore
(the mishnah continues) we don't know that the sechar of the mitzvah
chamurah would be greater.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger                 What you get by achieving your goals
http://www.aishdas.org/asp   is not as important as
Author: Widen Your Tent      what you become by achieving your goals.
- https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF            - Henry David Thoreau

On 17/8/21 4:59 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 07:56:01PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote:
>> On 16/8/21 4:42 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote:

>>> Like the people who buy 4 amos x 4 amos of land in EY just so that they
>>> can get a mitzvah for not working it next year. Of course, you wouldn't
>>> have gone to the plot to work it anyway.

>> You wouldn't have personally gone, but the other six years the farmer in
>> whose field your plot lies does work it on your behalf, together with the
>> whole field.  On shemita he doesn't.

> Doesn't really touch the broader idea. Are you going to make money
> the years the farmer works?

In principle, you do.  It's so little that it's not worth collecting, so 
you allow the farmer to keep it.

-- 
Zev Sero            Wishing everyone a healthy summer
z...@sero.name

.
R' Zev Sero wrote:

> The presence of a hechsher is not an indication that it was
> needed. The OU will put its hechsher on anything that the
> manufacturer wants to pay it for, whether it's needed or not.
> Why shouldn't it?  Why turn down business for no reason?  But
> if it does put its hechsher there, it will first investigate
> the product and make sure it's actually kosher, rather than
> rely on rules that say it doesn't have to
> And the same OU will readily tell you that you may buy the
> same product without a hechsher.

I think the simplest example of this (for those who drink cholov
hacompanies) is plain old milk. Do you need to worry about the vitamins and
other additives? No, you don't need to, but you can worry if you want to.
But with the OUD on the carton, you are assured that there is nothing to
worry about.

More relevant to the wax on the cucumbers: Granted that the label says "No
Wax Added", but I am a layman who doesn't know the industry regulations
about what constitutes "wax". Nor do I *care* about how it is defined. All
I care about is the kosher status of this product.

Perhaps the cucumber is coated with something other than wax, similar to
certain products that are legally labelled as non-dairy even though halacha
does consider them to be dairy. The OU assures me that *if* there is a
coating of any kind, it is both kosher and pareve.

Akiva Miller
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20210818/1d1d04b0/attachment-0001.html>

Wanted to share this, because it's an idea I don't think is sufficiently
integrated into our communal culture.

-micha

Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 18:15:45 +0000
From: The Rabbi Sacks Legacy Trust <i...@rabbisacks.org>

Covenant & Conversation
Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks zt"l

Against Hate
https://rabbisacks.org/ki-teitse-5781/

Rabbi Sacks zt"l had prepared a full year of Covenant & Conversation for
5781, based on his book Lessons in Leadership. The Rabbi Sacks Legacy
Trust will continue to distribute these weekly essays, so that people
all around the world can keep on learning and finding inspiration in
his Torah.

Ki Teitse contains more laws than any other parsha in the Torah, and it
is possible to be overwhelmed by this embarrass de richesse of detail. One
verse, however, stands out by its sheer counter-intuitiveness:

"Do not despise an Edomite, because he is your brother. Do not despise
the Egyptian, because you were a stranger in his land." (Deut. 23:8)

These are very unexpected commands. Examining and understanding them will
teach us an important lesson about society in general, and leadership
in particular.

First, a broader point. Jews have been subjected to racism more and longer
than any other nation on earth. Therefore, we should be doubly careful
never to be guilty of it ourselves. We believe that God created each of
us, regardless of colour, class, culture or creed, in His image. If we
look down on other people because of their race, then we are demeaning
God's image and failing to respect kavod ha-briyot, human dignity.

If we think less of a person because of the colour of their skin, we are
repeating the sin of Aaron and Miriam -- "Miriam and Aaron spoke against
Moses because of the Cushite woman whom he had married, for he had married
a Cushite woman" (Num. 12:1). There are midrashic interpretations that
read this passage differently, but the plain sense is that they looked
down on Moses' wife because, like Cushite women generally, she had
dark skin, making this one of the first recorded instances of colour
prejudice. For this sin Miriam was struck with leprosy.

Instead we should remember the lovely line from Song of Songs: "I am
black but beautiful, O daughters of Jerusalem, like the tents of Kedar,
like the curtains of Solomon. Do not stare at me because I am dark,
because the sun has looked upon me" (Song of Songs 1:5).

Jews cannot complain that others have racist attitudes toward them
if they hold racist attitudes toward others. "First correct yourself;
then [seek to] correct others," says the Talmud. (Baba Metzia 107b) The
Tanach contains negative evaluations of some other nations, but always
and only because of their moral failures, never because of ethnicity or
skin colour.

Now to Moses' two commands against hate,[1] both of which are
surprising. "Do not despise the Egyptian, because you were a stranger in
his land." This is extraordinary. The Egyptians enslaved the Israelites,
planned a programme against them of slow genocide, and then refused
to let them go despite the plagues that were devastating the land. Are
these reasons not to hate?

True. But the Egyptians had initially provided a refuge for the Israelites
at a time of famine. They had honoured Joseph when he was elevated
as second-in-command to Pharaoh. The evils they committed against the
Hebrews under "a new King who did not know of Joseph" (Ex. 1:8) were at
the instigation of Pharaoh himself, not the people as a whole. Besides
which, it was the daughter of that same Pharaoh who had rescued Moses
and adopted him.

The Torah makes a clear distinction between the Egyptians and the
Amalekites. The latter were destined to be perennial enemies of Israel,
but the former were not. In a later age, Isaiah would make a remarkable
prophecy -- that a day would come when the Egyptians would suffer their
own oppression. They would cry out to God, who would rescue them just
as He had rescued the Israelites:

"When they cry out to the Lord because of their oppressors, He will
send them a saviour and defender, and He will rescue them. So the Lord
will make Himself known to the Egyptians, and in that day they will
acknowledge the Lord." (Isaiah 19:20-21)

The wisdom of Moses' command not to despise Egyptians still shines through
today. If the people had continued to hate their erstwhile oppressors,
Moses would have taken the Israelites out of Egypt but would have
failed to take Egypt out of the Israelites. They would have continued
to be slaves, not physically but psychologically. They would be slaves
to the past, held captive by the chains of resentment, unable to build
the future. To be free, you have to let go of hate. That is a difficult
truth but a necessary one.

No less surprising is Moses' insistence: "Do not despise an Edomite,
because he is your brother." Edom was, of course, the other name
of Esau. There was a time when Esau hated Jacob and vowed to kill
him. Besides which, before the twins were born, Rebecca received an
oracle telling her, "Two nations are in your womb, and two peoples from
within you will be separated; one people will be stronger than the other,
and the elder will serve the younger." (Gen. 25:23) Whatever these words
mean, they seem to imply that there will be eternal conflict between
the two brothers and their descendants.

At a much later age, during the Second Temple period, the Prophet
Malachi said: "'Was not Esau Jacob's brother?' declares the Lord. 'Yet
I have loved Jacob, but Esau I have hated..." (Malachi 1:2-3). Centuries
later still, Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai said, "It is a halachah [rule, law,
inescapable truth] that Esau hates Jacob."[2] Why then does Moses tell
us not to despise Esau's descendants?

The answer is simple. Esau may hate Jacob, but it does not follow
that Jacob should hate Esau. To answer hate with hate is to be dragged
down to the level of your opponent. When, in the course of a television
programme, I asked Judea Pearl, father of the murdered journalist Daniel
Pearl, why he was working for reconciliation between Jews and Muslims,
he replied with heartbreaking lucidity, "Hate killed my son. Therefore I
am determined to fight hate." As Martin Luther King Jr, wrote, "Darkness
cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out
hate, only love can do that."[3] Or as Kohelet said, there is "a time to
love and a time to hate, a time for war and a time for peace" (Eccl. 3:8).

It was none other than Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai who said that when
Esau met Jacob for the last time, he kissed and embraced him "with
a full heart."[4] Hate, especially between family, is not eternal
and inexorable. Always be ready, Moses seems to have implied, for
reconciliation between enemies.

Contemporary Games Theory -- the study of decision making -- suggests
the same. Martin Nowak's programme "Generous Tit-for-Tat" is a
winning strategy in the scenario known as the Iterated Prisoner's
Dilemma, an example created for the study of cooperation of two
individuals. Tit-for-Tat says: start by being nice to your opponent,
then do to them what they do to you (in Hebrew, middah keneged
middah). Generous Tit-for-Tat says, don't always do to they what
they do to you, for you may found yourself locked into a mutually
destructive cycle of retaliation. Every so often ignore (i.e. forgive)
your opponent's last harmful move. That, roughly speaking, is what the
Sages meant when they said that God originally created the world under
the attribute of strict justice but saw that it could not survive through
this alone. Therefore He built into it the principle of compassion.[5]

Moses' two commands against hate are testimony to his greatness as
a leader. It is the easiest thing in the world to become a leader
by mobilising the forces of hate. That is what Radovan Karadzic and
Slobodan Milosevic did in the former Yugoslavia and it led to mass
murder and ethnic cleansing. It is what the state-controlled media did
-- describing Tutsis as inyenzi, ("cockroaches") -- before the 1994
genocide in Rwanda. It is what dozens of preachers of hate are doing
today, often using the Internet to communicate paranoia and incite
acts of terror. Finally, this was the technique mastered by Hitler as
a prelude to the worst-ever crime of humans against humanity.

The language of hate is capable of creating enmity between people of
different faiths and ethnicities who have lived peaceably together
for centuries. It has consistently been the most destructive force in
history, and even knowledge of the Holocaust has not put an end to it,
even in Europe. It is the unmistakable mark of toxic leadership.

In his classic work, Leadership, James MacGregor Burns distinguishes
between transactional and transformational leaders. The former
address people's interests. The latter attempt to raise their
sights. "Transforming leadership is elevating. It is moral but not
moralistic. Leaders engage with followers, but from higher levels of
morality; in the enmeshing of goals and values both leaders and followers
are raised to more principled levels of judgement."[6]

Leadership at its highest level transforms those who exercise it and
those who are influenced by it. The great leaders make people better,
kinder, nobler than they would otherwise be. That was the achievement
of Washington, Lincoln, Churchill, Gandhi and Mandela. The paradigm case
was Moses, the man who had more lasting influence than any other leader
in history.

He did it by teaching the Israelites not to hate. A good leader knows:
Hate the sin but not the sinner. Do not forget the past but do not be
held captive by it. Be willing to fight your enemies but never allow
yourself to be defined by them or become like them. Learn to love and
forgive. Acknowledge the evil men do, but stay focused on the good
that is in our power to do. Only thus do we raise the moral sights of
humankind and help redeem the world we share.

--


course, to imply that these were given to Moses by Divine instruction and
revelation, and thusly did he pass them onto us. This, in a deep sense,
is why God chose Moses, a man who said repeatedly of himself that he
was not a man of words. The words Moses spoke were those of God. That,
and that alone, is what gives them timeless authority for the people of
the covenant.

[2] Sifrei, Bamidbar, Beha'alotecha, 69.

[3] Strength to Love (Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress Press, 1977), 53.

[4] Sifrei ad loc.

[5] See Rashi to Genesis 1:1, s.v. bara.

[6] James MacGregor Burns, Leadership, Harper Perennial, 2010, 455.

On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 06:51:24PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote:
> > Doesn't really touch the broader idea. Are you going to make money
> > the years the farmer works?
> 
> In principle, you do.  It's so little that it's not worth collecting, so you
> allow the farmer to keep it.

But what does "in principle" have to do with my line of reasoning?

As I said last time in the very next words:
>>                             What did you give up for shemittah in
>> particular? Unlike the parting with money of buying a plot in EY, the
>> shemittah part is really effort free. Like the sekhar one could get for
>> not stealing something they aren't interested in.

>> If lefum tzaarah agra, how much berakhah will one get for a mitzvah that
>> involves no effort or tzaar?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger                 None of us will leave this place alive.
http://www.aishdas.org/asp   All that is left to us is
Author: Widen Your Tent      to be as human as possible while we are here.
- https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF          - Anonymous MD, while a Nazi prisoner


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



_______________________________________________
Avodah mailing list
Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
http://www.aishdas.org/lists/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://www.aishdas.org/lists/avodah/avodahareivim-membership-agreement/


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/lists/avodah/avodah-acronyms
(They are also visible in the web archive copy of each digest.)