Volume 22 Number 24
Produced: Wed Nov 29 6:23:01 1995
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Abarbanel Quoting Christian Sources
[Carl Sherer]
Bat-Mitzvah
[Michael Berger]
Crescas, Aristotle and Rambam
[George Max Saiger]
Eruv (2)
[Shmuel Jablon, Michael E. Beer]
Eruv in West Hempstead
[Jay Kaplowitz]
Food Customs / Standing Customs
[David Twersky]
Maharal Haggadah and Aberbanel
[Jeff Mandin]
Smoking
[Ari Shapiro]
Smoking and Halacha (2)
[Edwin Frankel, Dr. Shlomo Engelson]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <adina@...> (Carl Sherer)
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 95 21:11:40 IST
Subject: Abarbanel Quoting Christian Sources
I'm a bit confused by this whole thread. Does the fact that Abarbanel
apparently cites Christian sources for his commentaries mean that those
commentaries are to be treated differently than other things he wrote?
Does it mean that where there is an argument between him and someone
else on how to interpret a given verse that we should adopt the other
view where Abarbanel's view is (apparently or otherwise) based on
Christian or other non-Jewish sources? I appreciate that people are
a bit surprised by this (frankly I am too) but what does the fact
that he (apparently) used those sources mean to us as fruhm Jews?
-- Carl Sherer
Adina and Carl Sherer
You can reach us both at:
<adina@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Michael Berger <mberg02@...>
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 22:05:12 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Bat-Mitzvah
Regarding Jack Stroh's question about a father's saying "Barukh
she-petarani..." for his daughter's Bat-Mitzvah: the late Elyakim
Ellinson, in the first volume of his series on "Ha-Ishah veha-Mitzvot,"
deals with this issue in chapter 15 (pp. 171-180). By the way, he has
an appendix on the subject "should a mother also say 'Barukh
she-petarani'?" (pp. 181-84). While most later authorities think it
should only be said for a son, Rav Ellinson quotes a teshuvah of Rav
I. Nissim who wrote that logically, a brakhah should be recited over a
girl as well, yet because this was not the prevalent opinion among
acharonim, R. Nissim suggested reciting the brakhah without 'shem
u-malkhut.' R. Ellinson doesn't come down on the issue one way or the
other in this chapter.
Michael Berger
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: George Max Saiger <gmsaiger@...>
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 23:21:13 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Crescas, Aristotle and Rambam
Regarding the discussion between Alanacat and Alan Cooper re medieval
Jewish Aristotelianism, may I recommend a wonderful study by Harry
Austryn Wolfson of Harvard: "Crescas' Critique of Aristotle: Problems of
Aristotle's Physics in Jewish and Arabic Philosophy." Cambridge:
Harvard University Press. 1929.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <ShmuelAJ@...> (Shmuel Jablon)
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 23:37:02 -0500
Subject: Eruv
For a good English source on Eruvin see Rav Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer's ERUVIN
IN METROPOLITAN AREAS. The second addition was just published by Hebrew
Theological College.
[As a bonus, if you have questions, you can probably post them to
mail-jewish and get an answer directly from the author. Mod.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <MEBESQ@...> (Michael E. Beer)
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 21:44:34 -0500
Subject: Eruv
Etan Diamond asks a number of questions:
>1) when did this big spurt of eruv constructions begin? I know
>some cities had eruvim several decades ago (Toronto being one). When did
>YOUR city build its eruv?>
I grew up in FarRockaway New York and recall the Eruv being built
over 25 years ago. I also recall an eruv where my aunt and uncle live
in Plainview New York, being constructed about 15-20 years ago.
>2) is there any history written about eruvim in the United States
>or Canada?>
I really am not familiar with any, you might want to contact Rabbi
Shimon Eider.
>3) what would you say are the good definitive texts on eruvim?
>Preferrably in English)?>
To the best of my knowledge there is a book on the laws of eruv written
by Rabbi Shimon Eider, the most renound Eruv expert. It is published by Beth
Medrash Govoh of Lakewood, where I believe one can contact Rabbi Eider????
See you soon!
Michael E. Beer
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <iii@...> (Jay Kaplowitz)
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 20:31:55 -0500
Subject: Eruv in West Hempstead
I believe that the eruv in West Hempstead was one of the first to be
constructed in the United States. It was built around 1970 and has been
expanded several times since that time as the Young Israel community
moved into new sections of town.
Jay Kaplowitz
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <twerskyd@...> (David Twersky)
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 22:23:17 -0800
Subject: Food Customs / Standing Customs
Aaron Gross writes
> I am looking for reference sources regarding Jewish food symbols and
> symbolism... references and explanations of customs and recommendations
> are very desirable...
The following quote may prove to be (excuse the pun) food for thought.
It is taken from the Aruch Hashulchan Yoreh Deah Chapter 214:23.
[This portion of Yoreh Deah (Hilchos Nedarim) is not printed in the
standard editions of the Aruch HaShulchan, it was first printed in
1992 from manuscript (available from Ktav).
The Aruch Hashulchan (Yechiel Michel Epstein) writes concerning customs
that do not have the halachic status of binding "Minhag"...
And so too, in my humble opinion, concerning those customs practiced
in many places that special dishes are prepared on Shabbos and Yom Tov,
this is not called a Minhag to require everyone to prepare that dish. For
this custom is not superior to the custom to not do work the whole day
Friday which was a custom adopted to honor the Shabbos and nevertheless
the Jerusalem Talmud says that it's not called a Minhag, certainly here.
And it is obvious that customs regarding eating foods were clearly
not instituted by Talmidei Chachomim (Torah scholars).
And so too it appears to me that behold at the time of prayer according to
Talmudic law one is allowed to sit throughout the prayer except for the
Shmoneh Esrei where one must statnd. And there are many who have the
custom based on what is printed in the Siddur to stand for example at
"Vayevarech Dovid" and "Yistabach" and "Shiras HaYam", etc. This too
does not have the status of "Minhag" to allow us to call someone who
does not do this "one who changes the Minhag" ... Only on the prayer of
"V'hu Rachum" on Monday and Thursday the custom of all of Israel is to
stand as is brought down in Orach Chaim 134 and if one does not say it
standing he is called one who "breaks down the fence". It seems that
this was the original enactment. However other places in the prayer
except for Shmoneh Esrei there is no special obligation to stand and
each person can do as he wishes.
Besides this, I don't know if such matters come into the category of
"Minhag" that have the status of a vow. We only find this concerning
work (e.g. 14th of Nissan before midday --D.T.) or a matter of Mitzvah or
a fence and boundary for a Torah law and so forth, but not concerning
matters of food or drink or standing or sitting, except for those things
that we abstain from eating because of pain such as not having meat and
wine during the 3 weeks (Bein Hametzorim) and so forth. However to
distinguish between one food and another that is to make a food in this
fashion or in this fashion (b-dugma zu o' b-dugma zu) and similarly to
specifically stand or sit in a place where according to the law of the
Talmud there is no concern (ayn kepeidah), this is not relavant to Minhag.
Metzudas Dovid -- David Twersky on the interNET
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jeff Mandin <jeff@...>
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 11:03:03 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Maharal Haggadah and Aberbanel
Lawrence Feldman <larryf@...> writes:
> As an addendum to my previous posting in re the Maharal and the
> Abarbanel: Shlomo Mallin, editor and translator of the English-language
> version of the Maharal Haggadah, posits that the Maharal wrote his
> commentary on the Haggadah specifically to refute, almost
> point-by-point, the Abarbanel's earlier Hagaddah commentary. A condensed
> version of the Abarbanel's commentary is available in English, published
> by Artscroll. It would be instructive to compare the two commentaries.
This is not likely, as the Maharal Hagadah is a collection ("likut") of
his writings on the Exodus from his main works.
For Shlomo Mallin's "ideological vantage point", see his introduction to
"The Book of Divine Power", where he denigrates the Malbim's approach as
illegitimate and claims that pilpul is still being practised.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <m-as4153@...> (Ari Shapiro)
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 95 20:24:05 EST
Subject: Smoking
<A second question is even if smoking should be forbidden, should the
<halachic authorities take it upon themselves to do so? Given the
<addictive nature of smoking, forbidding it (to those that have already
<started smoking) may be in the category of a gezayra [enactment] that
<the authorities must forgo because most of the affected populace could
<not keep it.
The halachik authorities are not coming up with a new
gezera(enactment). If smoking is above the danger threshhold allowed by
the halacha then it is prohibited by the torah irrespective of whether
the people can follow it.
Ari Shapiro
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <frankele@...> (Edwin Frankel)
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 19:08:00 -0100
Subject: Re: Smoking and Halacha
Elie Rosenfeld posed some intersting questions, to which I would like to
add my own kvetch.
>First, does the level of risk involved in smoking make it forbidden?
>This is not an open-and-shut issue. After all, there is some level of
>risk involved in many activities that are clearly not forbidden;
>driving, flying, even crossing the street. Not only are these
>activities permitted, there is no requirement to even take a small
>effort to avoid them; e.g., walking a few blocks out of your way to
>cross the street at a less busy intersection. On the other hand, there
>are clearly risks which would be considered too dangerous from a
>halachic standpoint - e.g., stunt driving. The question is, precisely
>what level of risk crosses this line? Where do you place smoking on
>this scale? How about skiing? bungee jumping? skydiving? hang gliding?
>Etc., etc. Again, it's a rather tricky question without an obvious
>answer.
In each of the cases cited, the risk of the activity is recongizable,
but preventive steps are available to lessen the risk, or the risk has
over-riding advantages that make the risk worthwhile.
That is, in taking risks , people need to do a cost/benefit analysis.
I remember, last year, when stduying a unit on medical ethics being
confronted with the issue of organ transplant from a live donor (e.g.
kidney). Is it permissible. There are many views against it, including
the risk it places to the donor. On the other hand Fred Rosner's books
and Bleich's on the subject showed the other side of the issue, the
pikuach nefesh of the recipient.
It would seem to me that a similar analysis can be made of smoking from
a halachic perspective.
>A second question is even if smoking should be forbidden, should the
>halachic authorities take it upon themselves to do so? Given the
>addictive nature of smoking, forbidding it (to those that have already
>started smoking) may be in the category of a gezayra [enactment] that
>the authorities must forgo because most of the affected populace could
>not keep it.
On to a related issue. Why does the level of smoking seem so high among
the right wing Orthodox, particularly given the knowledge of its risks
now known to us?
For this I may have a halachic answer, although I don't like it - the
difficulty of withdrawal once one is addicted to nicotine.
I'd be interested in hearing what trained halachists who've studied the
issue think about the topic. I'd like to cite them as we discuss
smoking in the health classes I teach at the yeshiva.
Ed Frankel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <engelson@...> (Dr. Shlomo Engelson)
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 14:32:46 +0200
Subject: Re: Smoking and Halacha
>From: <er@...> (Elie Rosenfeld)
>First, does the level of risk involved in smoking make it forbidden?
>This is not an open-and-shut issue. After all, there is some level of
>risk involved in many activities that are clearly not forbidden;
>driving, flying, even crossing the street.
According to my understanding, all of these everyday "risky" activities
are permissible under the rubric of "shomer pta'im Hashem", that "G-d
watches over fools". R. Moshe Feinstein, in his oft-cited tshuvah on
smoking (permitting it) cites this principle. In his analysis there,
one of the factors to consider is whether or not the risk is generally
considered acceptable in society ("shaveh lekhol nefesh"), i.e, not
generally considered dangerous. All of these normal activities would
thus fall under this rubric, as did smoking when R. Moshe wrote. Today,
however, it is clear that smoking cannot be considered "sheveh lekhol
nefesh" regarding its risks, and hence this exception should not apply.
>A second question is even if smoking should be forbidden, should the
>halachic authorities take it upon themselves to do so? Given the
>addictive nature of smoking, forbidding it (to those that have already
>started smoking) may be in the category of a gezayra [enactment] that
>the authorities must forgo because most of the affected populace could
>not keep it.
I've heard this argument before, and I've never understood it, because
what is being suggested is not that a gzerah should be enacted, but
rather that the existing, de'oraita, law (venishmartem et nafshoteikhem)
be recognized as applying to smoking. Once might argue "mutav sheyihyu
shogegim velo yihyu mezidim" (better that they should violate the law
unintentionally than intentionally), but I don't see how this can be
applied when keeping silent would lead to more people starting to
violate this law.
I've seen (more than once) 12 year old clearly religious children
smoking in the streets. This is clearly unacceptable, and it should be
recognized as such.
Shlomo
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 22 Issue 24
