Volume 30 Number 85
Produced: Thu Jan 13 5:29:00 US/Eastern 2000
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
"Lord's Prayer"
[Shmuel Himelstein]
Christian "copying" (2)
[Cynthia Tenen, Wendy Baker]
Collect Phone calls (2)
[David Charlap, Yossie Abramson]
Jewish Databse
[Bill Bernstein]
Shabbos & Rosh Chodesh
[Arieh Kadosh]
Shliach Mitzva Money
[Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz]
Silent Prayer
[Chaim Tabasky]
Why is it better to say 'I like ham but God forbade me'
[Russell Hendel]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Shmuel Himelstein <shmuelh@...>
Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2000 15:27:37 +0200
Subject: "Lord's Prayer"
David M. Wildman has an interesting analysis of parallels between the
"Lord's Prayer" and Tefillah. Along the way, he notes:
"Lead us not into temptation - Ok, I don't have anything explicit for
this one." This is clearly in the preliminary morning Tefilah: Al
teveinu lo lidei cheit ... velo lidei nisayon."
Shmuel Himelstein
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Cynthia Tenen <meru1@...>
Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2000 08:49:49 -0500
Subject: Re: Christian "copying"
At 12:31 PM 1/6/00 +0000, Daniel M. Wildman wrote:
>I guess the import of "kingdom come" may have unJewish messianic
>implications, not sure.
Nope. That's just the King's English. <smile> (i.e., James I of
England) It means "all over your kingdom," in other words, everywhere.
--A "translation" from 17th century English that supports your point.
Remember, if you assume that there actually was such a historical
personage, then the fellow who became the Christian hero was a Jew, and
a rabbi at that. (Something which many Christian sects, in the last 20
years or so, have been trying, somehow, to come to terms with.) If, as
they believe, that prayer originated with their leader, then it's hardly
surprising that most of its contents would be reminiscent of (other)
Jewish prayer. If it originated with the first leaders of this sect,
still, most of them started life as Jews -- and thought they finished
life that way too.
-ct
Meru Foundation http://www.meru.org <meru1@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Wendy Baker <wbaker@...>
Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2000 10:39:21 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Christian "copying"
Just a few comments re the discussion of the "Lord's Prayer", recently
discussed. Since this prayer come directly fron Christian scriptue (the
"New" testament, in their terms) and is supposedly a sample prayer given
by their "chief prophet", himself a Jew, it would seem natural that
familiar Jewish phrases and concepts would be included, as he was
speaking to a Jewish audience. Would he not construct a prayer that
would be easy to understand and relate to for his Jewish followers?
Wendy Baker
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Charlap <shamino@...>
Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2000 11:40:07 -0500
Subject: Re: Collect Phone calls
Chaim Shapiro wrote:
> When I was in yeshiva, we were told not to play the Collect call game
> in which we call home collect, having a deal with our parents that
> they'd call back after refusing the call.
>
> My question is, What form of genivah is that? Are you stealing money
> by using the phone system in a manner they did not intend? Or, is it
> Genivas daas, pretending that you did intend to make the call for the
> operator that helped you?
The phone system is one in which you pay money to send messages across
their wires (or satellite links, etc.) A collect call is no different,
except that the receiver is expected to pay.
When you play the "Collect call game", you are sending a message across
the phone company's wires. The message is received. And nobody has
paid. That is theft.
Incidentally, there are some services for Europeans to place discounted
phone calls that are very similar to this. One company sets up
international toll-free phone numbers. People in Europe call the number
and provide the number they actually want to contact. The system then
disconnects and places two calls from the US - one to the caller and one
to his destination - and connects the two. They then bill the customer
for the two "legs" of the call.
This, however, is not theft (or at least it's not the same kind of
theft). The initial call to the toll-free number is being paid for by
the service. So the European phone company is getting paid for the call
that they originated.
> Would the fact that services like 1-800 Collect do not use a human
> operator to process the calls make a difference?
No. It doesn't matter who is involved. When you subscribe for phone
service (and calling a 1-800 number for a third-party phone company is
effectively the same as a short-term subscription) there is a contract
between yourself and the phone company stating that you will pay for
your calls. Coming up with a scheme to use their network and not pay
for it is wrong, whether or not human beings at the phone company are
involved.
> Would there be a halachik difference if, on occasion, my little
> brother answered the phone not understanding the game and accepted
> the call elimenating the inevietability of refusal?
Then you didn't actually steal anything. You placed a call and will pay
for it. Of course, you had the intent to steal the call, so I don't
think it completely gets you off the hook.
-- David
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Yossie Abramson <yossie@...>
Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2000 12:51:18 -0500
Subject: Re: Collect Phone calls
> Would the fact that services like 1-800 Collect do not use a human
> operator to process the calls make a difference? Would there be a
> halachik difference if, on occasion, my little brother answered the
> phone not understanding the game and accepted the call elimenating
> the inevietability of refusal?
> Chaim Shapiro
Working for a telecommunications company, I can tell you that it is
irrelevant whether you deal with a person or a computer. You are still
using an 800 number. The number is free for you to call, but the company
still has to pay for it. A phone company pays for all calls, whether it
is computer answered, or even if nobody picked up the phone.
HOWEVER, I heard a reason why you can use the collect call trick. I'm not
saying the reason is a good one, but it is a reason to allow it. If you
know that the caller will call you back, then the phone company is not
really losing money. Since they will be getting their revenue anyway.
This was a reason given in HS to allow it. Now, I realize that this
reason is probably not valid. A) Due to deregulation, the local phone
company may be different than the pay-phone company. B)The amount of
revenue generated by a local call is far less than the revenue generated
by a collect call.
Just my twenty-five cents worth.
Yossie Abramson
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Bill Bernstein <bbernst@...>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 10:39:09 -0600
Subject: Jewish Databse
In a recent Yated I read that Rav Eliyashiv shlita is calling for a
databse of Jews to stem intermarriages etc at least in Israel. Does
anyone have more info on this? Will this include people in chutz
la-aretz? It seems we are moving towards a situation where non-Orthodox
Jews will be treated like Karaites, basically unable to marry into the
Orthodox community. How do list members feel about this?
[I've sort of been waiting/dreading for this one to come up here. It's
gone through it's discussion cycle on Avodah already, and I figured it
was just a matter of time until it comes up here. I haven't been able to
follow all the discussion there (thier volume is more than 2-3 times
this list!) but if someone has and wants to summerize for here I would
appreciate it. Mod.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Arieh Kadosh <akadoch@...>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 15:08:12 -0500
Subject: Shabbos & Rosh Chodesh
>Situation: It's the middle of the summer and the sun isn't setting until
>8:30 and Rosh Chodesh is on Shabbos. You take shabbos in early, let's
>say at 6:45, and daven quickly so that you end up eating and finishing
>your meal before sunset. You are supposed to say Yaaleh V'yavo during
>Maariv, but the question is what to do for Bircas Hamazon?
Actually, by definition, taking in Shabbos early also means taking Rosh
Chodesh early. If one had forgotten to mention Yaaleh V'Yavo in either
Maariv or in Bircas HaMazon, then it is not necessary to repeat either
Tefillahs since Rosh Chodesh is mentioned by day.
A more interesting situation is as follows:
Consider Rosh Chodesh to be on Sunday, after Shabbos. (This will happen
IY"H in four weeks for Adar Rishon). Many are accustomed to eating
Seudah Shelishit (The third meal) in Shul. As is usually the case,
Shabbos Mincha davening finishes just about Shekiah (sunset). There are
many authorities who permit one to wash for the Third Meal within a few
minutes after Sunset. I have heard various opinions, ranging from 5
minutes to 12.5 minutes. Now this being true, this raises a
complication. Since the sun has set, Rosh Chodesh has "begun" and yet
we are permitted to consider the meal as belonging to Shabbos. What is
included in Bentsching? Certainly Retzeh for Shabbos must be mentioned.
Mentioning Yaaleh V'Yav for Rosh Chodesh would lead to a contradiction
as the meal belongs to "ONE" day and that day cannot be both Shabbos &
Rosh Chodesh. The Kitzur Schulchan Aruch towards the end of Chapter 44
raises a very similar point and recommends avoiding this doubtful
situation altogether -- Eat the third meal early.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz <sabbahillel@...>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 00:21:38 -0500
Subject: Re: Shliach Mitzva Money
> From: Carl M. Sherer <cmsherer@...>
> > Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz wrote:
> > When given the money, as "shaliach mitzvah money" you are being made a
> > shaliach (messenger) to take the money to Israel and give it there.
> > Thus, you would not be allowed to give it elsewhere.
>
> Hillel notes something here that is quite ironic - most of us give
> someone Shliach Mitzva money only when they are travelling to Israel. I
> say it is ironic, because I heard from one of R. Yaakov Kamenetsky
> zt"l's grandsons that R. Yaakov held that a trip to Israel was the one
> trip for which one did NOT need to be a Shliach Mitzva because going to
> Israel was a mitzva itself.
Since I was answering a post that referred to a trip to Israel, I used
Israel as the example. Let's change it to read
When given the money, as "shaliach mitzvah money" you are being made
a shaliach (messenger) to take the money to your final destination and
give it there. There, you would usually have to take it to the final
destination (rather than giving it a various travel stops on the way).
This assumes that the final destination is within a particular country
(as with a vacation in Israel). Otherwise, one should be careful to set
up the terms of the shlichus.
One other point, I have seen in various places a differentiation between
going on a trip to Israel and going for a long term stay (such as a year
learning in Yeshivah). I specifically do not speak about aliya since
that is a different matter. Note that Yaakov Avinu was not punished for
the extra time he spent learning in Yeshiva while he was punished for
the 22 years that he spent with Lavan because he delayed the extra time
after he was ready to leave.
Said the fox to the fish, "Join me ashore" | Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz
Jews are the fish, Torah is our water | Zovchai Adam, agalim yishakun
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Chaim Tabasky <tabaskc@...>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 14:00:27 +0200
Subject: Re: Silent Prayer
On the subject of inner/silent/whispered/enunciated/spoken prayer.
The Talmud Brachot 31a learns from the prayer of Channah (Shmuel I;1)
that prayer should be heartfelt, that it must be enunciated (the lips
must form the words) the voice should not be heard. Rashi takes the last
requirement to mean we shouldn't pray so loud it disturbs
others. Maharal (Netiv haAvodah ch.2) disagrees and says that the
essence of prayer is hidden, that it "works" because it connects up with
something very inner and out of sight. (hamadregah haelyonah hane'elemet
- the highest hidden level )
I believe the Ba'al ha'Tanyah somewhere says that although the essence
of tefilah is service of the heart, since the heart is pure and a
mitzvah must have a purifying effect on reality (tikkun) we have to
pronounce the words to bring them out into the "real" world.
The problem is then whether pronouncing the words is a means of
manifesting my own inner world, or perhaps trying to establish contact
with (in the phrase of Levinas) the "other" - prayer as a form of
communication.
"Open my lips" - heard from Rav Hershel Schechter shlita, may be
translated open my borders, my horizons (like sfat hayam - seashore)
Chaim Tabasky
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Russell Hendel <rhendel@...>
Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2000 21:32:59 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Why is it better to say 'I like ham but God forbade me'
Some recent postings cited the well known Judaic addage "It is
preferable to say 'I want to eat ham but the Torah prohibited me' to
saying 'I can't stand ham'". The obvious question is "Why?" What values
dictate that one statement is preferable to the other.
To answer this I cite Rav Hirsch's famous views on Satan (Gen 4). Rav
Hirsch cites an agaddic passage
>When satan entices someone and they give in to him then
>Satan goes up to heaven and complains I enticed so and so
>and he gave in!!!
Rav Hirsch suggests that the goal of Satan's enticements is for us to
say No! An analogy would be for a runner on a running machine to
increase the resistance or slope of his run. If he then gave up ('It is
too steep') then the runner would have failed. The very purpose of
increasing the steepness of the run is to give added physiological
stress so that the runner can increase his capacity.
This is the key to Rav Hirsch's approach. Sometimes adding stress is a
way of 'getting rid of someone'. But sometimes adding stess is a means
'of enabling improvement in the person's skills'. Rav Hirsch says that
Satan entices us so that we can increaes our 'running skills against
temptation'. We thereby become more proficient. (This is why Satan
complains if people misuse his stresses and 'give in').
Now we can understand why it is preferable to 'Like ham but say no' to
'Not liking ham'. If I 'don't like ham' then I am not practicing
anything and not improving my temptation-resistance skills. But if I do
like ham and say no then I am improving my spiritual capacity to stay
no.
Russell Hendel; Phd ASA; <RHendel@...>; Math
Moderator Rashi is Simple; http://www.shamash.org/rashi/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 30 Issue 85
