Volume 54 Number 92
Produced: Tue Jun 12 19:54:37 EDT 2007
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Aphorism Question
[Ed Norin]
Bowing with the Sefer Torah
[Carl Singer]
Expanded definition of Kashrut
[Leonard Paul]
Fiat Libellus Repudii
[Joel Rich]
The Higher Ones Level the Greater
[Baruch C. Cohen]
Rav Zvi Yehudah Kuk and the "Merkaz" approach to university
[Seth Kadish]
Schools and Shuls
[<skyesyx@...>]
Tamar Ross's Response
[Prof. Aryeh A. Frimer]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <engineered@...> (Ed Norin)
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 08:37:16 -0400
Subject: Aphorism Question
> I recently heard the following Hebrew aphorism "Im yaish makom balev,
> yesh makom babayit" - When there is room in the heart, there is room
> in the house.
My Mother told me that my grandfather used to say that exact saying in
Yiddish. He was born in south eastern Poland around 1880. Many luntsmen
came from Poland and stayed with my grandfather until getting on their
feet. My grandfather also helped his brother make a living in America
and made sure that my Mother would always help her sister because her
family was not as fortunate as ours.
Ed Norin
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Carl Singer <casinger@...>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 06:11:50 -0400
Subject: Bowing with the Sefer Torah
From: Ephi Dardashti <ephidardashti@...>
> In our synagogue one of our shelikhey tzibbur refuses to bow when he
> has the sepher Torah in his arms. A sepher Torah doesn't bow he
> says. I have not seen any bowing on the taking out of siphrey Torah
> amongst our brethren the Edot Ha Mizrakh.
This is nearly as I learned it. I've seen many a Chazzan while "bowing"
raise the Sefer Torah so as it doesn't "bow" with him.
I'm also bothered that when putting crowns or whatever atop the Sefer
Torah, some deal with the Sefer Torah rather clumsily -- dipping it for
the convenience of whomever is affixing the crown. Often the "afixer"
is grabbing the crown by the top rather than bottom and thus
exacerbating the situation.
Carl
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Leonard Paul <lenpaul@...>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 07:04:13 -0400
Subject: RE: Expanded definition of Kashrut
The points raised in this discussion are also given much concurrent
support in a seemingly unrelated matter that interestingly has received
little attention up to now: an attempt of the Conservative movement to
redefine the halacha of kashrus.
It was with considerable interest that I read the enclosed article in
the Jewish Press:
http://www.thejewishpress.com/page.do/21769/Conservatives_And_Kashrut.html
Despite all good intentions, does one seriously believe that
Conservative rabbis are actually qualified to render competent
independent opinions that deal with "safe, fair working conditions" and
such matters?
Leonard Paul
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Joel Rich <JRich@...>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 10:27:09 -0400
Subject: Fiat Libellus Repudii
I strongly recommend that the participants in this agunah discussion
listen to the following shiur:
Rabbi Michael Rosensweig -Halachic Minimalism or Maximalism? A
Conceptual Look at the Heter Mechira
http://www.yutorah.org/showShiur.cfm/718620/Rabbi_Michael_Rosensweig/Halachic_M
nimalism_or_Maximalism?_A_Conceptual_Look_at_the_Heter_Mechira
R' Rosensweig outlines the conditions under which we allow various
seeming "workarounds" (e.g. mchirat chametz)
KT
Joel Rich
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <azqbng@...> (Baruch C. Cohen)
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2007 09:43:33 -0400
Subject: Re: The Higher Ones Level the Greater
Rabboisai: Rabbi Daniel Korobkin, Rosh Kehilat Yavneh of Los Angeles
informed me that HaRav Eliyahu Dessler addressed this issue in in his
magnum opus sefer: 'Michtav Eliyahu.' I have provided below a brief
synopsis of HaRav Dessler's analysis of our "Nekudas Habechira" that can
be found in Rabbi Bentzion Sorotzkin Phd's exceptional article entitled:
"Bechira: How Free is Free Will" located at www.drsorotzkin.com/bechira.
Baruch C. Cohen, Esq., Los Angeles, CA.
<azqbng@...>
---
Nekudas Habechira
Rav Dessler points out that while most of our actions are the result of
our past experiences, actions and decisions (i.e., past acts of
bechira), and therefore do not qualify currently as bechira, yet every
person has a nekudas habechira (a point or area of bechira) where he
does experience conflict between the yeitzer hara and the yeitzer
hatov. He compares this to two countries in battle. There is a limited
area that constitutes the front - where the battle takes place. The
majority of the territory of each country is behind the front, and is
not, at that point, involved in the battle. Likewise, the "battle"
within each person. Some aveiros are below a person's nekudas habechira
(i.e., currently not within the sphere of influence of the yeitzer hara)
so that he would not even consider doing them. Other aveiros are above
the person's nekudas habechira so that he wouldn't consider not doing
them. The battle is limited to the area where the power of the yeitzer
hara and that of the yeitzer hatov are comparable (i.e., the nekudas
habechira).
Rav Dessler illustrates this concept with the example of a person who is
a long-time member of a gang heavily involved with crime. He may no
longer have the bechira to actually stop being involved in criminal
activity. He may currently be considered "compelled" to rob a bank.
Yet, he may have the bechira not to shoot the bank guard. This, then, is
his current nekudas habechira.
Responsibility and reward for behavior
Rav Dessler makes it clear that a person can only be held responsible
for behavior over which he has bechira (e.g., a tinok shenishba is
obviously not punished for aveiros he is totally unaware of). Likewise,
the converse. True reward is only for good behavior over which there is
conflict/bechira. (Of course, Hashem does reward good behavior done in
non-bechira situations, but it is a much lower form of reward). If a
person once had bechira over an aveira but, due to having become
habituated to it, no longer has bechira to avoid it, he is then punished
for having allowed himself to fall from the previous level when he still
had bechira. The same is true for reward.
It is for this reason, says Rav Dessler, that Lot merited being saved
from the destruction of S'dom for not betraying Avraham to Pharaoh
(Rashi, Bereishis, 19:29), rather than for the seemingly much greater
achievement of risking his life to protect strangers in S'dom. His
mesiras nefesh for hachnosas orchim was a result of his training in the
house of Avraham, and not a product of bechira, and therefore did not
merit special reward.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Seth Kadish <skadish1@...>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 13:59:40 +0200
Subject: Rav Zvi Yehudah Kuk and the "Merkaz" approach to university
Actually living for over a decade in a place where the religious
community is heavily dominated by hard-core "Merkaz" ideology (though
the city itself is mostly a secular one) may enable me to draw a picture
of the present-day situation (as opposed to Mechy Frenkel's fascinating
description of Merkaz Harav and Rav Zvi Yehudah zt"l in the 1960's).
First of all, Rav Kuk's famous speech at the founding of Hebrew
University was mostly a reflection of deep tension, not a reflection of
positive approval. In this, as someone earlier pointed out, it is hard
to argue that his son's disapproval of university is a break from the
father's position. Nevertheless, I still think it is very telling that
the son, and certainly most of the son's students (who are the vanguard
of today's Religious Zionist Torah world) would probably never have made
such a speech in the first place. (Nor, one might add, would they even
be invited to do so... :-)
In general, what goes for the "Merkaz" wing of today's Zionist yeshivot
(both the "Yeshivot Hakav" and the Har Hamor breakoff) is very similar
to what moderate black-hat yeshivot were like in the U.S. a generation
ago. Here are some typical features of the ideology:
*Yeshiva students (hesder) who need to do so for reasons of parnasah or
a future career may take courses outside of the yeshiva with academic
credentials leading to a degree.
*In the vast majority of cases we are not talking about a serious
academic education, but more likely a teacher's certificate. However,
there are exceptions: I had a chavruta with a Merkaz student who is also
a graduate student in neuro-psychology at the Hebrew University.
*The key term here is "outside the yeshiva," because the famous schism
between "Merkaz" and "Har Hamor" was on none other than the tendentious
question of whether or not a teacher-training institute might be
included within the formal framework of the yeshiva. For all the heated
arguments, I personally see Merkaz and Har Hamor as nothing more than
two sides of the same coin.
*Those who take "outside" courses remove themselves from the top rung of
students, because the belief is that a "gadol be-yisrael" can only
develop if his exclusive environment is the Beit hamidrash.
*Only one ideological/political voice may be heard within the Beit
hamidrash, with the justification that young (hesder) students need to
fully imbibe the yeshiva's outlook (its "kav") before they are mature
enough to confront other views. (So "kav" is roughly equivalent to "Daas
Torah.") In some yeshivot, books by dissenting Torah scholars are even
removed from the shelves of the beit hamidrash.
*All of this makes it highly unlikely that any Torah material or any
Torah person suspected to be influenced by academia will be allowed to
influence discussion in the Beit hamidrash. Delegitimization of
alternative Torah viewpoints is often buttressed by the claim that
criticized outlook is "Academic" rather than "Torani." This type of
criticism is often leveled against Yeshivat Har Etzion (along with other
yeshivot and institutions formally or informally associated with it).
Which leads one to wonder whether those who level the criticism really
have any idea what true academic argumentation actually is... :-)
*One wonders whether Rav Soloveitchik zt"l, whose visit to "Merkaz
Harav" half a century ago was movingly described by none other than Rav
Zvi Yehuda himself, would be allowed to give a Torah shiur in these
yeshivot today.
It is important to stress that there are some influential Torah scholars
and leaders who saw Rav Zvi Yehuda as their teacher, but who do not
share the approach outlined above. An excellent example is that of Rav
Chaim Druckman and Yeshivat Or Etzion. Such figures are usually viewed
with a kind of hesitant respect within the world described above.
Seth (Avi) Kadish
Karmiel, Israel
University of Haifa
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <skyesyx@...>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 07:10:28 -0400
Subject: Schools and Shuls
1. I make a general observation about the centrality of schools in the
Orthodox world, specifically RW Orthodoxy. Generally speaking, people
spend a maximum of 2 hours a weekday in shul (women far far less). The
influence of the shul on Orthodox society should be judged with this in
mind, especially in relation to the importance accorded to children,
families, and education, K-Kollel.
2. Good questions, and ones that have been asked for centuries. You
ask, specifically, why teachers aren't paid enough. To concede the
point, one reason teachers haven't been paid enough is that in the RW
world it has become almost the only viable means of earning a living for
many kollel yungerleit. Furthermore, for some reason there is the
(correct?) perception that the training a rebbi needs can be provided
in a series of workshops. What emerges is this: (a) the Torah education
necessary to be a rebbi is widely held - witness the thousands of
yeshiva/kolllel yungerleit. (b) The extra-Torah education necessary is
minimal. You then have lots of people who can do little else, and the
requirements for being a mechanech are easily attainable, similar to
blue-collar minimum-wage labor. This amounts to good old supply and
demandâ
I am not at all sure that rabbeim do not get paid what they "deserve."
(I leave aside the truly excellent rabbeim who are worth their weight in
gold, as I do the truly poor rabbeim who can be extremely harmful.
Again, I speak generally.) Aside from the S&D issue, I do not think
rabbeim get paid as poorly as they were in the 60s or 70s, or as
spottily. Today they make a relatively decent income, certainly given
the S&D curves, get paid on time, are off for a lot of the afternoon and
summers, and a host of other perks, such as operating within a frum
environment (this is not to be underestimated, as anyone who has holiday
party, business lunch, or shabbos/yom tov issues can attest!), and sharp
tuition reductions.
3. I think that the quality of today's yeshiva education, generally
speaking, is the best it has been since the days of Yehoshua ben Gamla.
This can be understood optimistically or pessimistically.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Prof. Aryeh A. Frimer <frimea@...>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 16:58:31 +0300
Subject: Tamar Ross's Response
Dr. Ross's opening ad hominum section of her response to my review is
uncalled for and unjustified. I refer the reader to my letter on Hirhurim
http://hirhurim.blogspot.com/ June 10th 2007. I hope that the final
published form will be have the ad hominum attack removed.
Aryeh
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 54 Issue 92
