Volume 46 Number 76
Produced: Fri Jan 28 6:08:37 EST 2005
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Administrivia
[Avi Feldblum]
Calendar question
[Irwin Weiss]
Conservative Judaism, Avoda Zara and Igrot Moshe (2)
[Martin Stern, Jacob Gross]
Date of Passover (2)
[Mike Gerver, Tal Benschar]
Halacha vs Emes ( Objective Truth)
[Shmuel Carit]
Molad (was: Calendar question) (2)
[<MJGerver@...>, Ira L. Jacobson]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Avi Feldblum <mljewish@...>
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 06:04:43 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Administrivia
We have two postings in this issue that come close, if not go over the
line, of one of my major rules from when the list set was set up. The
problem is that they are following up from a previous discussion which
one can rightly argue that I should have realized will get us here, but
nevertheless, I did post in previous issues.
I do not want, and will not allow, us to get into arguements over the
validity or lack or validity of any of the "Movements" in the current
Jewish Community. It was the great OCR Wars on net.religion.jewish that
gave birth to mail.jewish. At the same time, understanding R. Moshe's
stance as documented in the Igrot Moshe is a valid, if potentially
dangerous on a public list like this, subject. Assuming that the
original posting, asking to understand R. Moshe's statement was a true
request for simply understanding R. Moshe's position, I would think that
the two submissions in this issue will bring this discussion to a
close. I will place any additional responses on this topic to the same
level of scrutiny (if not higher - since I am stating this here) that I
would give to a new posting, rather than allowing any further drift in
the name of allowing an ongoing discussion to develop.
Avi Feldblum
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Irwin Weiss <irwin@...>
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 08:10:45 -0500
Subject: Calendar question
With regard to the question of how "late" or how "early" Rosh Hashana
falls, I would suggest this:
The Torah tells us to observe the holidays at their appropriate hour.
(Asher Tikr'u Otam B'Moadam---as they are called to you in their
appointed time---my non-literal translation).
In my view, Rosh Hashana will not be late or early, this year or any
other year. It will occur, (IYH), on the first day of the month of
Tishrei, as it always has.
Now, perhaps it is really September or October which occur earlier or
later.
<irwin@...>
Irwin E. Weiss, Esq.
Baltimore, MD (Eastern Time Zone)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 06:26:38 +0000
Subject: Conservative Judaism, Avoda Zara and Igrot Moshe
> Martin Stern writes that in calling Conservative Judaism "avoda zara",
> the Igrot Moshe "was merely following the long-standing Jewish polemical
> tradition of using phrases with such overtones to denigrate groups which
> have broken away from Jewish tradition."
>
> That may well be true. The problem, though, is that this polemical
> statement is used as the basis of a halachic opinion, that entry into a
> conservative synagogue is forbidden, just as entry to a pagan temple
> would be forbidden. By contrast, to my knowledge entry into a house of
> worship of a religion that is not avoda zara--a mosque, say--would not
> be forbidden. Is the entire responsum then only a polemic, and if so
> what is it doing in a collection of responsa?
Clearly Conservative 'Judaism' is not avodah zarah in the sense this
phrase is normally used as meaning idolatry. In R. Moshe's view, it is a
form of minut, heresy, in that it is based on a denial of the
traditional understanding of the concept of Torah min HaShamayim and the
acceptance of the theories of Higher Criticism regarding the authorship
of the Pentateuch.
Because its practices (in principle) do not differ very much from
Orthodoxy especially in more traditionally minded congregations, many
unsophisticated Jews are not aware of this. The latter are misled but
probably not heretics. As Chazal point out minut is more dangerous than
avodah zarah proper because it is not so obviously deviant and can more
easily mislead those who are not sufficiently discerning.
On the other hand, a mosque is a place of worship of non-Jews who accept
the same pure monotheism as we do without even the problem of shittuf,
associating other powers with HKBH, as in traditional
Christianity. While the latter might not contravene the ban of avodah
zarah for non-Jews, it does so for Jews and so a Jew may not enter such
a church. This is not true of Islam so the ban on entering a place
devoted to avodah zarah does not apply. Furthermore, nobody would think
that a mosque is a Jewish place of worship, nor is its image projected
as such.
However with Conservative places of worship, a Jew can be drawn into the
movement and become attached to it. This is the basic reason why such
places should be avoided and the term avodah zarah can be used as a
means of warning unsuspecting Jews of their dangers.
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jacob Gross <JacobBGross@...>
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 08:46:42 -0500
Subject: Re: Conservative Judaism, Avoda Zara and Igrot Moshe
Orrin Tilevitz wrote, in part:
"... The problem, though, is that this polemical statement is used as the
basis of a halachic opinion, that entry into a conservative synagogue is
forbidden, just as entry to a pagan temple would be forbidden. By
contrast, to my knowledge entry into a house of worship of a religion
that is not avoda zara--a mosque, say--would not be forbidden. Is the
entire responsum then only a polemic, and if so what is it doing in a
collection of responsa?"
Not only is entering a pagan temple prohibited, so are standing in its
shade (because one benefits from issurei hanaa [an object from which one
is prohibited from obtaining any physical or monetary benefit]), and
passing in its directions when there is an alternate route available
(lest people think that is ones destination).
I do not think anyone posits that a Conservative or Reform Temple is
asur behanaah. Whatever restrictions apply lie in the latter category.
Many popular publications habitually characterize the two unOrthodox
American movements as "two out of the three streams of Judaism", and
that is the general public perception. So there was good reason for
R. Moshe to prohibit crossing their threshold, to avoid an action that
people would tend to take as lending legitimacy to their practices (and
omissions) and beliefs (and non-beliefs), even absent any explicit
Talmudic prescription.
That is quite analogous to the latter class of prohibitions that Chazal
enacted to keep a distance from AZ (e.g., passing down the street where
their place of worship is located, even when there is no issue of
benefiting from AZ) for fear that one would be suspected of
participation in or sympathy with that movement.
So, yes, the entire responsum may be using AZ only as a figurative term,
but the analogy is quite apt.
Similarly, it is reported that Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik prohibited
entering a Conservative Temple on Rosh Hashanah, even just to hear
Tekias Shofar.
OTOH, there is no apparent danger that Jews will view Islam as an
alternative expression of Judaism, and it is not AZ, so it is quite
possible that no such distancing measures are applicable.
-- Yaakov Gross
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <MJGerver@...> (Mike Gerver)
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 17:38:21 EST
Subject: Date of Passover
Larry Israel writes, in v46n75,
I have looked at the archives and can not see a satisfactory
answer to the question of when Passover falls. This year, again,
Purim occurs after the vernal equinox. This means that Passover
is not in the month of the equinox, but in the next month. Or
does "hodesh ha'aviv" mean that the month of Nisan starts in the
thirty or so days after the equinox? In that case, what about the
earliest Passover, around April 5. Would that squeeze the start
of Nisan in on or after the equinox?
This question has come up in mail-jewish before, but I don't remember
exactly when, and I haven't tried to find it in the archives. But I
think I do know the answer to your question. At the time the fixed
Hebrew calendar was established by Hillel Sheni, the earliest omer was
on the vernal equinox (which can fall on March 20 or 21 in the Gregorian
calendar), and the earliest Pesach was a day before the vernal equinox.
Since then, Pesach, and the rest of the Hebrew calendar, have been
drifting ahead of the tropic year (the time from one vernal equinox to
the next) by one day every 200 odd years (the exact number is something
like 217 years, I think). So in the 1600(?) years since the time of
Hillel Sheni, the earliest Pesach should be 7 or 8 days later, March 26
or 27. I think it is true that March 26 is indeed the earliest that
Pesach can fall now. It could be that I'm off by one day.
Halachically, it does not create any problem that nowadays Pesach
sometimes falls more than a month after the vernal equinox, since even
in the days before the fixed calendar, when a Beit Din decided whether
to add an Adar Sheni, it was sometimes done for reasons other than to
prevent Pesach from falling before the vernal equinox. For example, an
Adar Sheni could be added if the barley crop wasn't going to be ready in
time to bring the omer, even if that meant Pesach would be more than a
month after the vernal equinox.
Mike Gerver
Raanana, Israel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Tal Benschar <tbenschar@...>
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 10:15:36 -0500
Subject: Date of Passover
Larry Weizman wrote:
I have looked at the archives and can not see a satisfactory answer to
the question of when Passover falls. This year, again, Purim occurs
after the vernal equinox. This means that Passover is not in the month
of the equinox, but in the next month. Or does "hodesh ha'aviv" mean
that the month of Nisan starts in the thirty or so days after the
equinox? In that case, what about the earliest Passover, around April 5.
Would that squeeze the start of Nisan in on or after the equinox?
If I recall correctly, accoring to the Gemara, the requirement that
Pesach fall beChodesh HaAviv means that it must be within Tekufas Nisan
-- meaning that it must fall in the Spring quarter of the year,
i.e. between the Spring Equinox and the Summer solstice. That would
mean March 21 through June 21. Similary, Succos must fall within the
Fall quarter -- Sept. 21 through Dec. 21.
I believe our fixed calendar always complies with these requirements.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Shmuel Carit <cshmuel@...>
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 13:11:10 +0000
Subject: Halacha vs Emes ( Objective Truth)
Can you lead me to sources / articles dealing with the issue of whether
Halacha or Halachik psak provides us with emes? Emes being defined as
objective truth.
Thanks,
Stuart Pilichowski
Mevaseret Zion, Israel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <MJGerver@...>
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 17:17:50 EST
Subject: Molad (was: Calendar question)
Ira Jacobson writes, in v46n75,
My trouble with this site ( http://www.geocities.com/Athens/1584/
, not the particular cited page) is that it gives the molad as six
hours later than is normally given everywhere else.
His explanation is that the time of the molad he gives is
precisely as derived from the halakhically mandated calculations.
Considering the caliber of those who think differently, his
explanation was not very convincing to me.
I don't think this is an issue that anyone should get upset over. The
molad is just a formal device for calculating when Rosh Hashana is. The
rules for specifying when Rosh Hashana is, in a given year, start out by
saying that you take the molad of Tishrei (as the molad is
conventionally defined), add six hours to it, and see what day of the
week it falls on. Rosh Hashana then falls on that day, unless it's on a
day that Rosh Hashana can't fall on, in which case Rosh Hashana is put
off until the next day, and in certain circumstances when the molad plus
six hours falls on Tuesday, Rosh Hashana is put off to Thursday. If we
redefine the molad as falling six hours later than the conventional
definition, then the rules are simplified, since you can skip the step
of adding six hours to the molad. I've always thought this was a
sensible thing to do. The only problem with it is that, since most
people have the conventional definition in mind when they refer to the
molad, it can confuse people if you don't make it clear that you are
using this new definition.
Certainly it makes no sense to criticize the new definition by saying
that it is not when the molad "really" is. The molad is not an
observable astronomical phenomenon. It is based on the astronomical new
moon (the conjunction of the moon and the sun), but only in an indirect
way, depending on an average time, and on a linear extrapolation from
Babylonian eclipse data which is off by several hours now anyway. In any
given month, the molad will not coincide with the astronomical new moon
anyway, using either definition of the molad.
Mike Gerver
Raanana, Israel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ira L. Jacobson <laser@...>
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 07:32:47 +0200
Subject: Re: Molad (was: Calendar question)
At 17:17 27-01-05 -0500, <MJGerver@...> stated the following:
[See above. Mod]
The molad as announced in synagogues is indeed an average molad that has
no correlation with the actual molad. Be that as it may, it serves for
defining when Ashkenazim and Sefardim (not most Teimanim) may first say
qiddush levana, and when they may no longer say that. For that reason,
the announcement in all synagogues is uniform. Any deviation from that
will cause confusion at best, and berakha levatala at worst.
IRA L. JACOBSON
mailto:<laser@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 46 Issue 76
