Volume 58 Number 36
Produced: Thu, 01 Jul 2010 12:42:31 EDT
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
"magical" influences on halacha (2)
[David Guttmann Eitan Fiorino]
Biblical division into chapters and verses (4)
[Martin Stern Shayna Kravetz Avraham Etzion Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz]
case-Study: Kedusha (2)
[Baruch J. Schwartz]
fast end times in Jerusalem
[Shmuel Himelstein]
fish and worms
[Harlan Braude]
kashrus symbols
[Perets Mett]
kosher in Arizona
[Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz]
the Emmanuel girls' school controversy
[Shmuel Himelstein]
the view of Rav Joseph B. Soloveitchik zt'l on the ordination of women
[Aryeh Frimer]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Guttmann <david.guttman@...>
Date: Mon, Jun 28,2010 at 12:01 AM
Subject: "magical" influences on halacha
R. Chipman wrote:
"It's not Russell's own opinion, He's obviously following the approach of
Rambam, who in this case is, it is true, outnumbered by the other Rishonim
[earlier mediaeval authorities - MOD], indeed almost a "Da'at yahid"
(singular opinion) but nevertheless a very important view to be taken with
great seriousness. See Hilkhot Avodat Kokhavim Ch. 11, esp 11.14."
Taking my earlier post a step further. If one reads Ramban on Devarim 18:9,
Vaykra 17:7, Shemot 20:3 and Breishit 1:18 and further a discussion on
magic in the early parts of Torat Hashem Temimah in Kitvei Haramban (Chavel ed.
volume 1 page 149), one sees that he struggles with the issue and his problem
is that he was living in Catholic Spain where the science of the time was
astrology, and necromancy was considered a scientifically proven fact. He
brings proofs from the "fact" that birds tell the future and so on . He
therefore dismisses Rambam and calls him a "fanatic" (Nitchassed) in this
matter who, based on Torah, denies factual daily occurrences!
Clearly the basis of disagreement is not Halachik but the opposite - a
misreading of how reality is to be understood. He believed himself to be the
modern and advanced scientist while Rambam was a fundamentalist who tried
to keep to the Halacha ignoring reality. If one reads Ramban carefully one
gets a clear picture that had he been enlightened about his "scientific
facts" he would have followed the Yad Peshuta understanding quoted by Rabbi
Meir Wise.
All our Rishonim searched for truth and had very little room for personality
cult when it came to the Truth. Unfortunately as the Galut progressed,
especially in Christian Europe where our Mesora faced constant threats of
extinction and in fact was very badly affected, we developed a chip on our
shoulder and our leaders lost that self confidence as predicted by our
prophets. Uva letzion goel!
David Guttmann
If you agree that Believing is Knowing, join me in the search for Knowledge
at http://yediah.blogspot.com/
Ve'izen vechiker (Kohelet 12:9) subscribe to Hakirah at www.hakirah.org
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Eitan Fiorino <afiorino@...>
Date: Mon, Jun 28,2010 at 11:01 AM
Subject: "magical" influences on halacha
Anyone interested in the topic should read Ephraim Kanarfogel's "Peering through
the Lattices" which discusses mystical and magical beliefs held by the Baalei
Tosafot. Joshua Trachtenberg's "Jewish Magic and Superstition" is a classic, if
somewhat dated text. Shaul Shaked and others have written on Aramaic
incantation bowls used by Jews in Sassanian Persia (ie, Talmudic-era Bavel).
Michael Swartz has a book on early medieval mysticism and magical thinking
entitled "Scholastic Magic." Those are a few interesting references that pop
into my mind that could form an substantive knowledge base for those interested
in the topic.
I would say that despite our *modern* understanding of the Biblical prohibitions
of sorcery and magic, it is very clear that magical beliefs (and even rituals)
we would view as preposterous at best and as constituting serious issurei
d'oraita at worst were held by/practiced by Jews, even extending into the elite
rabbinic groups, into the modern period (and clearly, in many cases, extending
right until today).
It is extremely difficult to be critical in retrospect of ancient, medieval and
early modern Jews for having magical beliefs that were widely held and
constituted for humanity a basic understanding how the world worked and how man
could relate to that world. I for one am not willing to declare Chazal or the
Baalei Tosafot as having been in violation of Biblical norms regarding magic for
precisely these reasons (don't ask me about the kabbalists, though ...). It is
also important to note how infrequently such concepts were worked into the
halachic decision-making process.
One could argue that it is far more problematic that today, despite a much
better understanding of how the world works, we have huge segments of Jewry
believing in magical concepts, with a universal "ho hum" from our rabbinic
leadership across the spectrum (even encouragement from many). Colored strings,
shlissel challah, various segulot, the list is long - unfortunately, what looks
like avoda zara to me (and others) constitutes an important part of many
people's Jewish belief and practice system. This represents a major failure of
Jewish education, in my view - we have failed to teach both proper Jewish
thought and belief, AND have failed to equip people with the logical tools and
scientific knowledge needed to reject magical thinking. I'm not holding my
breath waiting for change ...
-Eitan
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Mon, Jun 28,2010 at 02:01 AM
Subject: Biblical division into chapters and verses
On Sun, Jun 27,2010, Ira L. Jacobson wrote:
> On the other hand, the Gemara tells us (Megillah 22a):
>
>> Rav holds that a verse that Moses did not leave in the middle we may
>> not split; but Shemuel says that we may. So, according to Shemuel
>> may we stop in the middle of the verse? Did not Hanania Kara say: I
>> had great trouble when I was by R. Hanina the Great, who did not
>> permit me to stop in the middle of a verse, except for the
>> schoolchildren, because I had to teach them?
>
> Now, we hold that the division into chapters and verses is halakha
> leMoshe miSinai. But how did our ancestors know where a verse
> started and ended, before 1330 CE? Is there some contradiction here
> between the two sources?
Clearly the verse division is part of our masorah [tradition] since verses
are basically separate sentences and are defined by the ta'amei hakra
[cantillation marks]. This is the basis of the Gemara Ira quotes.
On the other hand, the chapter divisions are of Christian origin and, as I
pointed out previously, often were designed to further Christian exegesis
and go against the Jewish understanding of the text, as in the case, for
example, of the separation of Shabbat from the Creation narrative.
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Shayna Kravetz <skravetz@...>
Date: Mon, Jun 28,2010 at 02:01 AM
Subject: Biblical division into chapters and verses
In reply to a note from Ira L. Jacobson on Sun, Jun 27,2010 at 04:01 AM:
> As stated succinctly in Wikipedia:
>> The current division of the Bible into chapters and the verse
>> numbers within the chapters has no basis in any ancient textual
>> tradition. Rather, they are medieval Christian inventions. They were
>> later adopted by many Jews as well, as technical references within
>> the Hebrew text....
> On the other hand, the Gemara tells us (Megillah 22a):
>
>> Rav holds that a verse that Moses did not leave in the middle we may
>> not split; but Shemuel says that we may. So, according to Shemuel
>> may we stop in the middle of the verse? Did not Hanania Kara say: I
>> had great trouble when I was by R. Hanina the Great, who did not
>> permit me to stop in the middle of a verse, except for the
>> schoolchildren, because I had to teach them?
>
> Now, we hold that the division into chapters and verses is halakha
> leMoshe miSinai. But how did our ancestors know where a verse
> started and ended, before 1330 CE? Is there some contradiction here
> between the two sources?
No contradiction. The numbered chapters and verses are indeed Christian
inventions. However, the shape and length of the Hebrew verses is, as I
understand it, defined by the trop / cantillation marks which are part of the
Jewish apparatus of Torah reading and long preceded the superposition of
numbered verses and chapters. Thus the Gemara could indicate that we are
prohibited from dividing verses where Moshe did not, since we had the trop to
assist us in figuring out where each verse begins and ends.
Kol tuv,
Shayna
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Avraham Etzion <atzion@...>
Date: Mon, Jun 28,2010 at 04:01 AM
Subject: Biblical division into chapters and verses
There is a misunderstanding of the issue. There clearly were divisions
into verses as is indicated in early Mishnaic sources.
There was no division into chapters; the division was between Parsha Petucha [a
section where the rest of the line after a verse is left blank] and Parsha
Setuma [a section where the next verse starts on the same line after a short
blank space].
The numbering of verses and division of chapters is indeed Christian; the
Koren Bible attempts to rectify this.
Avraham Etzion
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz <sabbahillel@...>
Date: Mon, Jun 28,2010 at 09:01 AM
Subject: Biblical division into chapters and verses
Ira L. Jacobson <laser@...> wrote:
> Now, we hold that the division into chapters and verses is halakha
> leMoshe miSinai. But how did our ancestors know where a verse
> started and ended, before 1330 CE? Is there some contradiction here
> between the two sources?
The division into "Parshiot" in the Torah is not the same as the
division into "chapters" (parshot). A parshiya is the division in the
way that the Torah is written to skip to the next line (parshiya
ptecucha - open) making the remainder of the current line blank, or
putting a lengthened space in the line (parshiya setuma - closed).
This is halacha leMoshe misinai. The actual sentences are based on the
trop (cantillation) of the Torah which is also a tradition from Moshe.
The artifact of the goyim that we are speaking about is an arbitrary
division into numbered chapters, where the individual verses (which
are from our tradition) are themselves given numbers based on the
count within the nonJewish chapters (which have nothing to do with our
tradition).
Thus, there is no contradiction between the two sources that you
quote. They ae talking about two different things.
Sabba - ' " - Hillel
Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Baruch J. Schwartz <schwrtz@...>
Date: Mon, Jun 28,2010 at 02:01 AM
Subject: case-Study: Kedusha
Yisrael Medad (<ybmedad@...>) asks for references to studies of the
proper way to recite the kedusha.
The most thorough and conclusive recent study, to my knowledge, is that of Rabbi
Benjamin S. Hamburger in the first volume of Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz (Bene
Berak 5755). Chapter One (pp. 23-45) deals with the kedusha in general and
Chapter Two (pp. 46-58) goes into the specific issue of the musaf kedusha on
Shabbat and Yomtov. This study is unsurpassed for scope, information, clarity of
presentation and definitiveness of conclusions. Eye-opening and highly
recommended, as all of R. Hamburger's works.
Baruch Schwartz
Efrat
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Mon, Jun 28,2010 at 02:01 AM
Subject: case-study: Kedusha
On Fri, Jun 25,2010, Yisrael Medad <ybmedad@...> wrote:
> Now, to the Reverse Influential Kabbalah Phenomenon. It is clear that,
> at the very least, those praying in Nusach Ashkenaz should remain quiet
> during Kedusha and only say aloud from the second section, "kadosh,
> kadosh.". But it is my experience, and I ask the list members to
> confirm or otherwise, that the overwhelming practice is not as dictated,
> that is, most say aloud the first section prior to the shatz and are
> definitely not silent.
This was the prevailing custom in German and most other West European
communities. The custom to which Yisrael alludes was common in Eastern
Europe and it was its prevalence there that prompted the Mishnah Brurah's
comments that tried to justify it.
> I would appreciate comments on this and on its ramification regarding
> other customs as I am sure there are academic and rabbinic articles on
> this that I have not yet seen.
There is a full and detailed discussion of this topic in the first volume of
Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz by R. B.S. Hamburger (pp. 23 - 45).
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Shmuel Himelstein <himels@...>
Date: Wed, Jun 30,2010 at 02:01 PM
Subject: fast end times in Jerusalem
All the different calendars and announcements I saw regarding the end of the
fast day of the 17th of Tammuz in Jerusalem list it as either 8:20 or 8:22
p.m. this year.
I don't quite understand where these figures come from. Let me explain my
dilemma:
The Tukechinski calendar, known for about a century as the most
authoritative calendar in Jerusalem, states - in the laws regarding the
ninth of Av - that the fast ends 27 minutes after sunset. In an aside, as it
were, it states that all the other rabbinic fasts end 17 minutes after
sunset.
According to Tukechinsky, sunset on the 17th of Tammuz this year was at 7:51
p.m. (making allowance for DST). That would mean that the fast should have
ended at 8:08 p.m. Where, then, do the figures of 8:20 and 8:22 p.m. come
from?
I may add parenthetically that a very large number of synagogues in
Jerusalem consider 17 minutes after sunset as late enough to recite the
Torah-mandated Shema evening reading throughout the year.
Shmuel Himelstein
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Harlan Braude <hbraude@...>
Date: Mon, Jun 28,2010 at 12:01 PM
Subject: fish and worms
In MJ Vol.58 #34 Digest, Mechy Frankel wrote:
> antibiotics alone could have alleviated so much human misery ... it would
> seem a great calumny to suggest Chazal deliberately refrained from sharing
> such information.
I'm not well versed enough to comment meaningfully on Mechy's thoughtful
post, but this last comment reminded me of being taught that Chizkiyahu hid the
'sefer rufuos' (book of remedies) because people depended on it for healing at
the expense of their faith in HaShem.
I don't know how folks feel about links to other sites, but here is one to a
lengthy posting that impressed me very much (as did much of the give and take in
the responses) on the subject of Science and the Sages. Sometimes, I wish I knew
more about these anonymous contributors.
Interestingly, one of the reponses offers a contradictory explanation of what
Chizkiyahu did from the Rambam's Peirush HaMishnayos (Pesachim, Perek 4, Mishna 9)..
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/all-science-and-astronomy-comes-from-the-torah
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Perets Mett <p.mett@...>
Date: Tue, Jun 29,2010 at 07:01 PM
Subject: kashrus symbols
Hillel Markowitz wrote:
> I have been told that in England, there is no copyrighted symbol placed on
> labels, but the London Bais Din publishes a book each year of the current
> products being supervised. Is this true? If not, what is the symbol of the
> London Bais Din that appears on the product label?
This is completely untrue, as can be ascertained from the Kashrus publication of
the London Beth Din.
In common with other kashrus organizations, they used a copyrighted symbol (a
stylized LBD) which appears on products under their supervision.
They also publish a lengthy list of products which have no formal supervision,
or no supervision at all, but which they consider kosher for consumption.
Perets Mett
London
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz <sabbahillel@...>
Date: Mon, Jun 28,2010 at 12:01 PM
Subject: kosher in Arizona
In reply to Batya Medad's enquiry about kashrut in Arizona, I am including this
information in order to help others who might look at the same area.
I found a number of listings that claim "Kosher" but do not give the hashgacha
[supervision --MOD] in their ads so I could not verify that they are or are not
kosher. The Vaad Hakashruth in Phoenix should be able to tell you about Tempe or
Scottsdale. The google search also found "kosher style" listings which are
normally not trustworthy. Most of the results are the equivalent of Yellow Page
listings but do not point to an individual restaurant web site.
Since I am not from the area, I cannot tell you anything about the
certification. I did find this
* Tiphereth Israel - Chabad Center, 2110 East Lincoln Drive Phoenix,
602-944-2753
* http://www.kashrut.com/travel/UStravel/
* http://www.jewishaz.com/commdir/page.mv?0102
Since I do not know how far Phoenix is from Tucson, you could also look at
* http://www.jewishtucson.org/page.aspx?id=108302
Google is your friend. Since a Bing (or google) search gets listings from the
phone book and does not show the actual hashgacha, try this listing:
* http://www.jewishphoenix.org/page.aspx?id=104795
Locally produced products bearing the Kosher symbol are also available
in grocery stores (Crockett Honey, Safeway milk).
I also did a search at http://shamash.org/kosher/ and got information for
Phoenix and Scottsdale with no matches for Tempe.
Trader Joes has a number of different kosher products. You will need a
list of Kosher symbols that can be trusted. I use the Baltimore Star-K
list as there are too many possibilities to research individually.
email the Star-K and ask for the list.
The contact information is at the following URL.
* http://www.star-k.org/comments_questions.asp
Sabba - ' " - Hillel
Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Shmuel Himelstein <himels@...>
Date: Sun, Jun 27,2010 at 05:01 AM
Subject: the Emmanuel girls' school controversy
The statement was made, a few issues of MJ earlier, that:
"Until this law suit came into being, the school had 2 tracks - the
religious track which serviced the religious girls i.e. the Slonimers and a
handful of Sefardi girls who are religious - and the non-religious track
which serviced the non-religious girls - all of them Sefardim."
That statement is wrong. The consensus is that the dispute centered on two
issues related to the dress code:
a) whether the girls' shirts must be buttoned up to the very top or whether
the top button can be unbuttoned.
b) whether the sleeve must go down to the wrist and be buttoned, or whether
the sleeve can be 10 centimeters (2.5 inches) below the elbow.
Thus, to call these Sefardic girls "non-religious" is incorrect.
Shmuel Himelstein
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Aryeh Frimer <frimea@...>
Date: Sun, Jun 27,2010 at 07:01 AM
Subject: the view of Rav Joseph B. Soloveitchik zt'l on the ordination of women
Dear Friends,
You are cordially invited to read our new paper, "The View of Rav Joseph B.
Soloveitchik zt'l on the Ordination of Women," published June 23, 2010 in "Text
and Texture" of the Rabbinical Council of America; available online at
http://text.rcarabbis.org/?p=958.
Kol Tuv
Aryeh
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 58 Issue 36
