Volume 10 Number 36
Produced: Tue Nov 30 23:02:17 1993
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Asher Wade
[Neil Parks]
Healing non-Jews on Shabbat (2)
[Freda Birnbaum, Frank Silbermann]
Hillul Shabbat for a Non-Jew
[Aryeh Frimer]
Recent Submissions
[Isaac Balbin]
T'khelet
[Merril Weiner]
Tzedaka
[Steve Roth]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <neil.parks@...> (Neil Parks)
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 93 23:59:00 -0500
Subject: Asher Wade
Jewish Learning Connection presents two lectures by:
Asher Wade, former Methodist pastor in Hamburg, Germany, then yeshiva
student in Jerusalem, and currently popular lecturer in Israel.
"Coming Home: A Pastor's Conversion to Judaism"
Tuesday, Dec 7, 1993 at 8 pm
Heights Jewish Center
14270 Cedar Road
University Heights (Cleveland), Ohio
Suggested Donation $5.00
"The December Dilemma: A New Twist"
Wednesday, Dec 8, 1993 at 12 noon
Jewish Community Federation
1750 Euclid Ave.
Cleveland
Suggested Donation $5.00. Lunch available for a nominal fee.
Reservations required for lunch--call (216) 371-1552.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Freda Birnbaum <FBBIRNBA@...>
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 93 18:07 EDT
Subject: Healing non-Jews on Shabbat
In V10N31, Alan Zaitchik asks:
>I am troubled by a number of postings that have come up over
>the last few weeks.
>
>1. Healing non-Jews on Shabbat "mishum eivah". Am I the only reader of
>the list who is bothered by the implication that a non-Jewish life is
>less important than violating a shvut d'rabanan?
NO, you are not, this issue has come up before and 3 or 4 of us have
expressed concerns about this also.
>Lest I be accused of questioning the correctness of halacha let me
>rephrase this: what can one make of this halacha in terms of a
>fundamental commitment to the value of ALL human life? I have to
>confess that the only position I can make sense of here is that the
>poskim went looking for some heter that would allow them to give the
>ethically right practical psak (go ahead and heal the person), and just
>ducked the philosophical question altogether. I would have felt better
>had we ended up talking about "darchei shalom" rather than "mishum
>eivah", as in other cases, but there it is!
I don't have sources, but I'm pretty sure one of the tacks taken in
working on this issue IS the "darkei shalom" approach.
In connection with Alan's question
>3. What's this Rosh Yeshiva worship that confuses a Rosh Yeshiva with a
>Chassidic Rebbe? The idea of the "infallibility" of g'dolim is
>shockingly anti-Litvish. But there has been such a Chassidization of the
>Yeshiva world that I suppose I shouldn't be shocked. In evidence I offer
>all those "Art Scroll"-like books on various Gdolim which consitute a
>new pseudo-history of the Yeshiva "greats".
AND with the recent discussion on "daas Torah" and rabbinical authority,
I'm wondering if there is some correlation between attitudes towards
saving non-Jewish lives and healing non-Jews on Shabbos, and attitudes
towards rabbinic authority and "daas Torah"? My own anecdotal evidence
suggests that there is, but it's not exhaustive. Any thoughts on the
subject?
Freda Birnbaum, <fbbirnbaum@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Frank Silbermann <fs@...>
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 93 14:04:44 -0500
Subject: Re: Healing non-Jews on Shabbat
In Volume 10 Number 31 Alan Zaitchik complains about recent postings:
> 1. Healing non-Jews on Shabbat "mishum eivah". Am I the only reader of
> the list who is bothered by the implication that a non-Jewish life is
> less important than violating a shvut d'rabanan? What can one make
> of this halacha in terms of a fundamental commitment to the value of
> ALL human life?
>
> The only position I can make sense of is that the poskim went looking
> for some heter that would allow them to give the ethically right
> practical psak (go ahead and heal the person), and just ducked
> the philosophical question altogether.
I agree.
> I would have felt better had we ended up talking about "darchei shalom"
> rather than "mishum eivah", as in other cases, but there it is!
Given the obligatory nature of Halacha, had the rabbis given greater
piority to saving a gentile's live than keeping, say, Shabbas, no one
would ever be able to keep Shabbas. Instead, we would have to dissipate
all our energy seeking out gentile lives to save. Considering the
current problems in Bosnia and Africa, such lives seem to be almost
without number.
Had they given the rabbinic laws of Shabbas equal priority with saving
gentile lives, then everybody would be confused as to what to do.
By giving the rabbinic laws of Shabbas higher priority in principle, but
allowing us to violate them to save a gentile's life when when an
immediate decision is thrust upon us, the desired behavior results.
I've often read that the rabbis were not interested in elegant general
principles or succintly-stated philosophy, but rather they were
interested in concrete behavior. Therefore, I would be reluctant to
conclude anything about the relative importance of rabbinic fences
versus gentile lives from the way the Halacha is stated.
Frank Silbermann <fs@...>
Tulane University New Orleans, Louisiana USA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Aryeh Frimer <F66235@...>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 93 12:48:10 -0500
Subject: Hillul Shabbat for a Non-Jew
Alan Zitchik was bothered by the very idea that "pure halacha" (without
social considerations such as "darchei Shalom/eivah") does not permit
the violation of the Shabbat to save the life of a non-Jew. I should
point out that if one goes through the Talmudic discussion in Tractate
Yoma (85a and b) with the commentaries, it becomes emminently clear that
a priori one should not be able to violate the Sabbath for a Jew. After
all one who violates the sabbath gets the death penalty - hence, shabbat
is more important than any human life! The bottom line why we permit
violating the sabbath for a Jew is that it "pays off in the long run".
Or to use the Talmuds terminology "hallel alav Shabbat ahat kedei
she-yishmor Shabbatot Harbeh" (Yomah 85b line 13) - better to violate
one Sabbath so that he will be able to observe many Sabbaths. This
argument works only for one who keeps or can potentially keep the
Sabbath, i.e., Jews. Without such an argument the sabbath would take
precedence over all Human life.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <isaac@...> (Isaac Balbin)
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 93 01:53:34 -0500
Subject: Re: Recent Submissions
| From: Alan Zaitchik <ZAITCHIK@...>
|
| I am troubled by a number of postings that have come up over
| the last few weeks.
|
| 1. Healing non-Jews on Shabbat "mishum eivah". Am I the only reader of
| the list who is bothered by the implication that a non-Jewish life is
| less important than violating a shvut d'rabanan?
It depends where you start from Alan. As the Rov Z"TL was always want to
point out, Torah and Halakha are the definition of Jewish Morality. One
doesn't start from a western feeling and attempt to impregnate that with
Torah quotes as a means of establishing a palatable Western-Torah. Of
course, there may be *Halakhic* support for your feelings, but one needs
to do better than quote a Pasuk here and there. We can start with the
Rambam and work backwards and then forwards, but we can't start with
`things bothering me.'
| 3. What's this Rosh Yeshiva worship that confuses a Rosh Yeshiva with a
| Chassidic Rebbe? The idea of the "infallibility" of g'dolim is
| shockingly anti-Litvish. But there has been such a Chassidization of the
| Yeshiva world that I suppose I shouldn't be shocked. In evidence I offer
| all those "Art Scroll"-like books on various Gdolim which consitute a
| new pseudo-history of the Yeshiva "greats".
This is not new. Chassidism has had an effect on the Litvishe since it
started. Reb Chaim of Volozhin wrote his Nefesh Hachaim *in response*
to the Tanya of Rav Schneur Zalman of Liadi. Elements of
Chassidism are not anathema to Litvaks (Big statement). Unless the
Chossid is seen to contravene Halocho, as the Vilna Gaon originally
perceived it, the differences are one of emphasis.
I happen to be a big supporter of the existence of a tapestry of
approaches. I would share your view if I could no longer see the
difference between the two groups. I feel one can still see the
difference quite clearly and hence am quite unconcerned.
| basic difference is not appreciated. Anyone who remembers Rav Shach's
| blistering sarcasm about those who are concerned only about the
| "shtoochim" (territories, as in "occupied territories") would not be
| confused.
I am not concerned by people who worry mainly about Shtochim. That's
their emphasis. In a similar way, one can easily find areas of Torah
subconsciously put on the back-burner by either Litvishe or Chassidishe
groups. Indeed, we find our Avos and teachers had the ability to stress
certain Midos and activities. Each was different, each with a different
emphasis. Rav Shach is certainly entitled to object, but at the same
time the Kookniks or Chabadnikim are equally entitled to do what they
perceive is `right.'
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <weiner@...> (Merril Weiner)
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 93 02:18:19 -0500
Subject: T'khelet
I am currently looking for Tzitzit, Tallitot K'tanot and Tallitot
G'dolot dyed using the dye from the Murex Trunculus. Any information
would be greatly appreciated. Please forward information either to
mail-jewish or directly to me.
Thank you.
Merril Weiner
<weiner@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <rot8@...> (Steve Roth)
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 93 08:42:01 CST
Subject: Tzedaka
David Zimbalist writes:
>However, with the tremendous underfunding of most educational
>institutions in our localities and the number of Jewish poor in our
>localities, how much can we afford to send to tzedakos across the globe?
You raise a good point that a lot of people neglect, but there are clear
dinim (rules) in hilchos tzedaka (laws of charity-giving) regarding what
proportion of one's maaser money (money set aside for charity) should go
where (your city, outside your city, vs Eretz Yisrael).
>With that in mind, I would think that the amount of tzedaka that is
>available for such "outside" causes is so limited that the cost of
>checking is almost a waste.
I have to differ with you, and so do the Vaad Hatzedakos of several large
cities in the US (Chicago, Baltimore., LA, etc). It is not permitted to
throw your money away-giving to someone who is a "faker" or is otherwise
not deserving should be prevented. Therefore, the checking must be done,
and is worth the cost.
Steve Roth, MD; Anesthesia & Critical Care; Univ of Chicago
tel: 312-702-4549 (office)/312-702-3535 (fax)/312-702-6800 (page operator)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 10 Issue 36