Volume 46 Number 71
Produced: Sat Jan 22 19:49:50 EST 2005
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Asceticism or Fasting (2)
[<rubin20@...>, Janice Gelb]
Asceticism/R' Steinman
[Sperling, Jonathan]
dowry?
[Leah S. Gordon]
Flatbush shiurim: History of Krias HaTorah; History of Tefillah
[Gershon Dubin]
Kallah's family hosts the wedding
[Tzvi Stein]
Population Explosion in Egypt (3)
[Baruch J. Schwartz, Ira Bauman, Matthew Pearlman]
query: BARAH
[Stan Tenen]
Rav Shteinman's Trip
[Bill Bernstein]
Shidduch rules (was: Costs of Weddings)
[Perry Zamek]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <rubin20@...>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 08:50:51 -0500
Subject: Asceticism or Fasting
> From: Batya Medad <ybmedad@...>
> > What's so disturbing? You've never heard of asceticism or fasting in
> > Judaism? In my book, here is a man who has spent (at least) the last
> > 70...
> It may be done, but it's not consistent with Judaism. It is forbidden
> to "beat" ourselves, starve ourselves, etc. It is a mitzvah to nourish
> and cherish the body. Just because some people, even learned ones, may
> do it, it shouldn't be emulated or imitated. It is not the ideal.
Before people casually dismiss something, they should reflect for a
minute or two if perhaps somebody who spent seventy plus years studying
torah might know a little more about Jewish tradition than them. For
hundreds of years, from the time of the Gemarah (remember Rav Zadok who
fasted forty years)asceticism or fasting was widely accepted. There are
two full tractates devoted to asceticism and fasting (nedarim and to a
lesser extent, nazir). Kabbalah seforim were replete with Gillgul Sheleg
(rolling in snow etc) and other none permanent mortifications of the
body. It was with the advent of chassidus that such practises fell into
disfavor. But even the Besh't never meant to claim that asceticism was
not consistent with Judaism, just that there were other methods of
drawing close to Hashem.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Janice Gelb <j_gelb@...>
Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 15:07:39 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: Asceticism or Fasting
Batya Medad <ybmedad@...> wrote:
> It may be done, but it's not consistent with Judaism. It is forbidden
> to "beat" ourselves, starve ourselves, etc. It is a mitzvah to nourish
> and cherish the body. Just because some people, even learned ones, may
> do it, it shouldn't be emulated or imitated. It is not the ideal.
A very good point. I think what disturbed me about this story, and the
story about the rav who didn't eat "non-Jewish food," is that these
stories are told as being proud of this behavior and implying it is
behavior to emulate. If a particular person decides to take on extra
pieties for their own reasons and background, that's one thing but to
cite such stories as behaviors that everyone should emulate is somewhat
disturbing.
-- Janice
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Sperling, Jonathan <jsperling@...>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 10:53:14 -0500
Subject: Asceticism/R' Steinman
R' Steinman is widely known for his asceticism, and thus there is no
particular reason to suspect that this description of his diet was
inaccurate. His home furnishings reportedly consist of a bed, a table,
and a chair. Judaism does not require one to live this way, but there
is certainly a value in Judaism of perishah, for those who are able to
attain it. Those who suggest that this is "not consistent with Judaism"
might do well to read Mesilas Yesharim.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Leah S. Gordon <leah@...>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 02:33:07 -0800
Subject: dowry?
chips@eskimo wrote:
>Has paying for the wedding replaced the dowry?
Dowries (or their reverse, bride-prices), are highly culture-specific.
They came about because whichever spouse was perceived culturally to
benefit more from the marriage, usually had to contribute more
financially to the start-up of the new family unit. Naturally, from a
feminist perspective, this whole idea is troubling to me.
(I fail to see any halakhic content in any dowry customs or wedding
payments, by the way, nor any halakhic connection between dowry and
wedding costs. I would not be surprised to find halakhic justification
for skimping on the wedding per se in order to have more family start-up
money.)
Let me add that I think it is shameful for a family to "limit to 50
guests" the invitation list of another family based on who contributed
what to the wedding. If there are (and there always are) financial
constraints, then the whole tenor of the party must be altered. It is
simply inappropriate to start cutting out family members instead. Many
could have unlimited guests if they had them to a light dessert/lemonade
reception in a public park...plan "up" from there.
--Leah S. R. Gordon
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Gershon Dubin <gershon.dubin@...>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 13:50:53 GMT
Subject: Flatbush shiurim: History of Krias HaTorah; History of Tefillah
From: Chaim Tatel <chaimyt@...>
<<I would appreciate it if someone attending could take notes and post
them in the web (perhaps on the leining group at Yahoo).>>
Please give details about this Yahoo group.
Gershon
<gershon.dubin@...>
[My best guess would be the group Gabbai. Here is the public description:
The purpose of this group is for Rabbis, Gabbaim of shuls and any Jews
who are interested in davening or leining to discuss the Davening, Torah
reading of the week, any issues that Gabbaim face in their shul and to
resolve any questions or problems you may have regarding the luach for
the week.
I will also post questions regarding Gabbaim and how they handle certain
situations.
If I'm wrong, I'm sure Chaim will let us know what group he was refering
to. Mod.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Tzvi Stein <Tzvi.Stein@...>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 06:37:43 -0500
Subject: Re: Kallah's family hosts the wedding
From: <chips@...>
> > Not that it's any of my business but (1) it's traditionally the
> > Kallah's family that plans and hosts the wedding
> > What is the halachic source of this minhag?
> Has paying for the wedding replaced the dowry?
Not in chareidi circles in Israel. There the bride's parents must also
buy an apartment, which ranges 100K and up. If that's not a dowry, I
don't know what is. Incidentally, when you get Israeli chareidim at
your door (or in shul) collecting for "haschnossos kalla", it's this
100K+ that they're collecting for... no Israeli would need to make a
trip abroad just to collect for a wedding, although that's what most of
the donors probably think.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Baruch J. Schwartz <schwrtz@...>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 14:36:54 +0200
Subject: Re: Population Explosion in Egypt
For a discussion of the mathematical formula whereby 70 souls came down
to Egypt with Jacob and in 210 years became several million (600,000
males of 20 and over plus their spouses and families), see Ibn Ezra's
Shorter Commentary on Exodus, at the beginning of Beshallah on the word
vahamushim (Exodus 13:18).
And don't forget to feed the birds.
Baruch
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <Yisyis@...> (Ira Bauman)
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 22:56:35 EST
Subject: Re: Population Explosion in Egypt
Does anyone know the mathematical formula whereby 70 souls came
down to Egypt with Jacob and in 210 years became several million
(600,000 males of 20 and over plus their spouses and families)?
When I was a mere lad in Yeshiva University, I took a course in Ancient
Near East history. The instructor, whose name escapes me, asked how is
it that several million Jews could leave the continent of Africa whose
total population then only equaled 11 million without some comment by
independent observers at the time? In fact, how could anyone have tried
to stop them? It gets worse when we try to factor in the medrash that
says that 80% of the population of Jews died during the plague of
darkness. The total population of Jews would then supercede the rest of
the people of Africa, much less Egypt. They could then simply walk out
unchallenged.
His solution was that when the Torah says the word Elef which we
translate as thousand, it really should be translated as Aluf or family.
It would then give us a historically more realistic figure. In my
opinion, it wouldn't work because the calculations during the censuses
taken in the desert wouldn't work out. Any comments?
Ira Bauman
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Matthew Pearlman <Matthew.Pearlman@...>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 10:45:42 -0000
Subject: Population Explosion in Egypt
> Does anyone know the mathematical formula whereby 70 souls came down
> to Egypt with Jacob and in 210 years became several million (600,000
> males of 20 and over plus their spouses and families)?
Perhaps a bigger question is how we are so sure that it was 210 years in
Egypt, which leads to the requirement for such a birthing explosion. My
understanding is that this derives from Rashi (presumably based on a
midrash) from the word "redu - go down" which has gematria 210. It is
not universally accepted by the Rishonim, and does not follow the plain
meaning of the verses, which imply that we were in Egypt for 400 (or 430
years).
Matthew
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Stan Tenen <meru1@...>
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 20:23:52 -0500
Subject: Re: query: BARAH
>At 04:47 AM 1/20/2005, Matthew Pearlman wrote:
>From: Andrew Heinze <heinzea@...>
> > Can someone help me understand what it means that in Marcus Jastrow's
> > lexicon, the verb "barah" is said to have had, in Biblical Hebrew, the
> > meaning "to hollow out"?
>Just to note that Ibn Ezra (on Bereishit 1:1) says that "bara" does not
>mean creation "yesh me-ayin" (ex nihilo - something from nothing) but
>rather means "ligzor v'lasum g'vul nigzar" loosely "to define the
>borders of an object".
>This has been taken as potentially part of a much bigger debate as to
>whether creation ex nihilo is a fundamental part of our belief.
Matthew Pearlmlan's contribution is, in my opinion, important and
correct. The idea that BARAH means "to define the borders of an object"
is an excellent interpretation.
The idea is simple. The size and shape of a flute determines the range
of musical tones it can produce. The size and shape of the universe
determines the "musical tones" of life that can exist within it. When we
define borders, we define what can occur within these
borders. Physicists now believe that the information in the volume of a
black hole is displayed on its event horizon -- its border.
Our ability to experience Torah as a "Tree of Life" depends on our
"grasping" it, and "grasping" establishes the borders in our hand -- and
in our will, and in our mind. The boundaries that enable Torah to come
to life within us are the huqim, which literally mean "boundaries".
And Bet, being a house, establishes the boundaries of our personal life.
Establishing boundaries is an act of "hollowing out," and an act of
allowing for creation.
Best,
Stan
PS There was an earlier posting to MJ-Tech, based on letter analysis of
the word Barah. For those interested please contact Stan.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Bill Bernstein <billbernstein@...>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 09:02:09 -0600
Subject: Re: Rav Shteinman's Trip
I have to echo Carl Singer's post on Rav Shteinman's trip, or more
accurately the portrayal of it. I presume the rav knows what he's doing
and chooses accordingly. My issue is with the reporting of the story.
I recall he made a trip a few years ago to NY and the reporting was
similar: what he took with him, how his particular customs were
accomodated and so on.
It is frequently reported in mussar literature that such behavior is
acceptable but should not be publicized. Yet we live in a time when
unusual, even seemingly bizarre, behavior is offered as proof of one's
piety and saintliness. I am bothered by the Jewish press holding up
these practices,which should remain private, as somehow models of
behavior. I am more bothered that someone might get the idea to ape
them. I contrast this with several comments I heard from people
acquainted with different gedolim who reported "yeah, Rabbi So-and-So is
a real Regular Joe." I wish we had more "Regular Joes" like that.
KT
Bill Bernstein
Nashville TN.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Perry Zamek <perryza@...>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 13:04:21 +0200
Subject: Shidduch rules (was: Costs of Weddings)
Anonymous wrote:
>One of my son's Rosh Yeshiva's has established "shiddach" rules -- So my
>son goes on shiddach dates wearing his Shabbos best -- even to play
>miniature golf! He's not to spend any money -- but then he went out
>with a girl who suggested a venu that had a cover charge .... it's all
>narishkite.
I think the last three words says it all - but who's the fool here? The
boy, who dresses up to go on a date, but won't fork out a few dollars
for fear of "breaking the rules"? The girl, who gets the wrong
impression - that the guy is a cheapskate (when he's really being a good
frum boy and doing what his Rosh Yeshiva says)?
If these "rules" are any indication, they serve neither side's interests
- the only interest they serve, perhaps, is that the Yeshiva has the
"right" kind of image.
A good suggestion for Anonymous's son: When dating, follow the
requirements of the fifth volume in Shulchan Aruch. In other words, use
common sense.
Perry Zamek
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 46 Issue 71
