Avodah Mailing List

Volume 40: Number 19

Tue, 15 Mar 2022

• 1. Re: Discovered text (Akiva Miller)
• 2. Re: Rabbi not answering a question (Akiva Miller)
• 3. Making an Eruv by Renting Reshus (Micha Berger)
• 4. Re: Discovered text (Micha Berger)
• 5. Re: YU and Torah U Madda today (Allen Gerstl)
• 6. Re: YU and Torah U Madda today (Micha Berger)
• 7. Women, Megillah Reading Location (Prof. L. Levine)

.
R' Joel Rich asked:

> How do those who propound the theory that texts recently
> discovered were kept out of the main stream by god?s will,
> understand why did he allow us to find them now? As a test
> or as a hint that now is the time to incorporate them or
> something else?

I can't imagine what "test" you might be referring to. Could you be
suggesting that if we were to find a genuine text written by a genuine
authority, but it had been only recently discovered, we should treat that
text as an evil temptation?

My approach to this is to remember that for the first 2448 years of this
world's existence, all of Torah Sheb'ksav was in the category you describe.
There was a time before that when (in a certain respect) Torah consisted of
nothing more than Sheva Mitzvos Bnei Noach. And before that there was only
one mitzvah.

Please don't quibble over any details in that paragraph; it was a bit
poetic, true. My point is that the world changes, and what's right for one
generation is not the same as what another generation needs, and it is
obvious to me that Hashem gives us what we need exactly when we need it.

(If a text was lost, Hashem had a reason for it. So too when it was found.
Sometimes I wonder if Ravina and Rav Ashi had edited and finalized a Gemara
Bavli on one or more of the missing masechtos. Perhaps they did, and every
single copy got burnt in the bookburnings, or otherwise lost somehow or
other. Perhaps it was Hashem's judgement that we didn't really need them?)

A related question is how much weight to assign to those discovered texts.
If it was written by a rishon, for example, but discovered nowadays, do we
treat it as a rishon, despite missing out on centuries of vetting and
comparison with other writings? This is way above my pay grade, and I will
not attempt to answer it.

Akiva Miller
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20220311/33eb4152/attachment-0001.html>

.
R' Joel Rich asked:

> Question about a statement made in a shiur that there were some
> questions that a rabbi shouldn?t answer but let the person do
> as they will. I wasn't clear as to whether that was based on
> the thought that the person would not listen or some other basis.
> What I would want to understand is if someone comes in asking for
> a psak why is it preferable not to tell him what we understand
> God's will to be?

I too wonder why someone would withhold knowledge of the Ratzon Hashem from
someone who came seeking it. Ideally, this question should be posed to the
person who made that statement, not to us.

But since you *are* asking us, the answer that first comes to my mind is as
you suggested, if there is a reasonable fear that the questioner might not
be able to comply with the Ratzon Hashem, it is better for his actions to
be shogeg than deliberate.

Upon further thinking... There is also a concept in Torah of "ayn m'galim
elah l'tzinuim", certain things are not revealed except to those of a
certain caliber. This seems to be very close to the situation RJR is
describing. My understanding of this concept is that certain halachos are
too easily misunderstood and/or misapplied by ordinary folk, and the rabbi
must be careful with what he says and how he says it. As it is said,
"First, do no harm."

Akiva Miller
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20220311/27937927/attachment-0001.html>

I want to float an answer of my own imagining to the question RYME asks
in AhS OC 382:2-3. (Recent AhS Yomi http://aishdas.org/ahs-yomi .) If the
gemara says that chazal made it difficult to make an eruv if there is a
non-Jew in the chatzeir because we don't want Yisraelim moving into the
same chatzer as a nakhriim -- shelma yilmod mima'asav. The question is,
how does renting the nakhri's rights to the chatzer solve the underlying
problem?

RYME has his own answer, see se'if 3. Here is the suggestion I want the
chevrah's feedback on:

The gemara says this rental is particularly complicated, because the
typical nakhri would assume you're trying to pull some kishuf on him. Even
if we take this broadly, the gemara is saying that the need for rental
weeds out nakhriim that don't trust us.

So, what if the point of the sekhirus is a way to distinguish between
nakhriim whose maasim are dangerous ones to be influenced by and possibly
learn, and those who are on the right page? What if Chazal were saying,
if you can work out a rental agreement with the guy, he isn't likely
enough to be a negative influence to warrant a gezeira against sharing
a chatzeir with him?

RYME gives an answer that well fits the gemara (62a) and Rashi ad loc --
that by making them do this deal every week (a matter Rashi raises),
they make staying there difficult.

But my suggestion could fit that too. It is only the nakhri who isn't
trusting us and is reticent to make the deal who would make the sekhirus
a weekly burden. And the nakhri whose behavior isn't so negative that
they would be a bad influence wouldn't make weekly problems out of it.

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger                 The Maharal of Prague created a golem, and
http://www.aishdas.org/asp   this was a great wonder. But it is much more
Author: Widen Your Tent      wonderful to transform a corporeal person into a
- https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF    "mensch"!     -Rav Yisrael Salanter

On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 06:38:20AM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote:
> I can't imagine what "test" you might be referring to. Could you be
> suggesting that if we were to find a genuine text written by a genuine
> authority, but it had been only recently discovered, we should treat that
> text as an evil temptation?

Like Rabbeinu Chananel and the Meiri. Works we knew from quotes and
citations they existed, but we didn't have the text themselves and the
vast majority of what they said until the 20th century.

> A related question is how much weight to assign to those discovered texts.
> If it was written by a rishon, for example, but discovered nowadays, do we
> treat it as a rishon, despite missing out on centuries of vetting and
> comparison with other writings? This is way above my pay grade, and I will
> not attempt to answer it.

In the other direction, it definitely interferes with halakhah kebasrai
when the latter authority couldn't have seen the former's work.

On the other hand, we don't have various acharonim arguing peshat in
the Meiri the way we do for Rashi and Rambam. We have much more clarity
about what they said, or more importantly -- what potential meaning of
what they said is to enter the discussion.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger                 Problems are not stop signs,
http://www.aishdas.org/asp   they are guidelines.
Author: Widen Your Tent              - Robert H. Schuller
- https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF

> On Fri, 4 Mar 2022 R' Ben Bradley <bdbradle...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "There seem to be three distinct models of learning Madda.
> 1. TIDE of R Hirsch, who advocates learning chol from the vantage
>    point of Torah.....
> 2. RYBS with his dialectic/tension/never the twain shall meet approach...
> 3. Torah u'Maddah of R Norman Lamm with its synthesis approach...

> DOI: I'm a Hirschian in this regard and many others. I'm actually
> quite repelled by R Lamm's approach. But that's by the by....

I believe there is a fourth approach, that of the RAMBAM. In the latter,
"secular studies" become kodesh as a part of Talmud i.e. a means to
see the greatness and glory of HKB"H through his creations; and thus as
a path to fulfilling the mitzvah of Ahavat Hashem. This is not a means
only as per Rav Hirsch of participating in "yishuvo shel olam" and not as
only as a handmaiden of other Torah studies such as geometry for Ervin,
but a subpart of the third section of Torah learning after Mikrah and
Mishnah after the previous two are well-learned.

Kol tuv,
Eliyahu

On Mon, Mar 07, 2022 at 08:07:53PM +0000, Allen Gerstl wrote:
> I believe there is a fourth approach, that of the RAMBAM. In the latter,
> "secular studies" become kodesh as a part of Talmud i.e. a means to
> see the greatness and glory of HKB"H through his creations; and thus as
> a path to fulfilling the mitzvah of Ahavat Hashem. This is not a means
> only as per Rav Hirsch of participating in "yishuvo shel olam" and not as
> only as a handmaiden of other Torah studies such as geometry for Ervin,
> but a subpart of the third section of Torah learning after Mikrah and
> Mishnah after the previous two are well-learned.

First, do you know where the Tambam says this? Because his definition
of talmud in 1:2 only talks about the means of deriving new halakhah
from pesuqim and pre-existing halakhah. For that matter, his definition
of Talmud Torah is entirely Miqra (Tanakh), Mishnah (Halakhah Pesuqah)
and this definition of Gemara.

Hashkafah and understanding the glory of HQBH are mentioned as means to
ahavas and yir'as Hashem in Yesodei haTorah 2:2, and not talmud Torah
at all.

And, recall that in the Rambam's world, there was no line between
philosophy and science. Aristotle's Metaphysics was just that, the book
after Physics. Instead of science there was Natural Philosophy, and
all that metaphysics about intellects is what causes all the motion the
physics is about. So I am not sure how to extend the Rambam's worldview
to ours. He didn't so much deny the line between Torah and Maddah as
not invent a line between Metaphysics and Natural Philosophy, and thus
hashkafah blends into proto-science.


Second, I think you understate RSRH's position. Derekh Eretz is part of
being refined. It's not simply a pragmatic means of living in the world
or understanding Torah, it is part of the Mensch-Israel ideal. And, the
union is not only about us learning from Yefet's sciences and liberal
arts, it is two directional. He equally talks about Sheim being the
moral voice in general society.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger                 If you won't be better tomorrow
http://www.aishdas.org/asp   than you were today,
Author: Widen Your Tent      then what need do you have for tomorrow?
- https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF            - Rebbe Nachman of Breslov

From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis


Q. Women are certainly obligated in the mitzvah of Megillah reading. Is it
preferable for women to go to Shul to hear the Megillah reading, or is it
equally acceptable for them to hear the Megillah at home if that is easier?

A. Regarding the performance of mitzvos there is a general concept of
?b?rov am hadras Melech? (when a crowd performs a mitzvah, it is more
beautiful). This is especially true for the reading of Megillas Esther
which incorporates an element of pirsumei nisa (publicizing the miracle).
The larger the crowd, the greater the publicity. The question is whether
the concept of ?b?rov am? applies to women as well.

This seems to be a matter of dispute among poskim. The Chelkas Yaakov (OC
232) writes that there is no obligation of ?b?rov am? for women. The
Mishnah Berurah (689:1) writes as well that only in some communities do the
women go to shul to hear the Megillah reading. However, the Chayei Adam
(155:7) writes that indeed men, women, and children should all make an
effort to hear the Megillah in shul in order to fulfill the mitzvah in the
optimal manner, ?b?rov am?. In practice, there are different customs, and
one should consult the local rabbi.

I am surprised that the OU writes "one should consult the local rabbi"	
The local rabbi may not be Orthodox, and even if he is, who says he is
competent to answer this question.  The Jewish Press used to write,
"Consult your local competent Orthodox rabbi."

From this I deduced that there must be a local incompetent local Orthodox rabbi!?

YL
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20220315/7f54ac9d/attachment.html>

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



_______________________________________________
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.)