Volume 59 Number 54
Produced: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 15:34:18 EDT
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
A good way to learn mishnah? (2)
[David Ziants Josh Backon]
Christians and Moslems (2)
[Akiva Miller Alex Heppenheimer]
Left-over korbanot
[Stuart Wise]
Lo Yishama al Picha (It shall not be heard through you)
[Martin Stern]
Modern Orthodox
[Orrin Tilevitz]
Prohibition of entering a church (2)
[Chana Luntz Eitan Fiorino]
Secular use of Hebrew in the Diaspora
[Leah Aharoni]
seeking leniencies / seeking stringencies (was: Shower on second day o
[Carl Singer]
Shower on second day yom tov (2)
[Sam Gamoran Ben Katz]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Ziants <dziants@...>
Date: Wed, Oct 13,2010 at 07:01 PM
Subject: A good way to learn mishnah?
Thank you very much, Carl, for the citations (MJ 59#53).
I am also very happy that there are modern teaching methods, and agree
with you that there is a lot of progress in the way things are done at
school. (My little daughter, when I asked her, also said that the loud
music doesn't bother her at all, and there are other reasons why she did
not want to do it when I asked.) I hope that they expand the program to
include other masechtot [sections of the mishna] and other texts. I am
using the CD to also learn off by heart - or maybe relearn as I am sure
I tried remembering this many years ago - the first mishnayot so I can
correct her on the spot when she spontaneously starts reciting/singing
this, and I do not have to start groping for a printed mishna or a
siddur with this in.
Especially because it is enjoyable, the music can be addictive, but
surely this is only a positive addiction - or maybe not...
Do you, or does your wife who has a professional opinion, know if there is a
limit to the number of times one (adult/child) can hear and sing along
in one go the first mishna of Avot to the popular tune of "v'karaiv
pezurainu" with the loud accompaniment and maintain a healthy balance?
David Ziants
Ma'aleh Adumim, Israel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Josh Backon <backon@...>
Date: Thu, Oct 14,2010 at 02:01 PM
Subject: A good way to learn mishnah?
Carl Singer wrote (MJ 59#53):
> As someone who grew up in Hebrew schools where rote repetition was considered
> the primary teaching methodology, it's nice to see some progress being made.
Here's a post (MJ 34#06) I made in 2001 on the role of music in Jewish education:
> See Pirkei Avot 6:6 on *arichat sefatayim*. The MAHARAL in Derech Chaim
> 6th Perek indicates that learning by reciting out loud "mo'il l'havanat
> ha'davar heitev" (greatly benefits learning).
> BTW there is a psychologist (W. Wenger) in Gaithersberg MD who has
> developed a method based on this [with eyes closed, describe an image
> out loud for 10 minutes) to drastically raise IQ [3/4 point for every
> hour of practice] as measured by standard tests of IQ. Our group at the
> medical school gave the neurochemical explanation based on levels of
> glutathione peroxidase and its redox and antioxidant effects.
>
> In 1976, a member of our shul who had recently come on aliya from North
> America asked me for help. His 16 year old son was in a very low level
> school. I took the kid, tape-recorded the Wenger protocol and we
> rehearsed for about 90 minutes. Six months later, the kid got into a top
> yeshiva, became an *illui* [genius], passed the Israeli Bagrut high
> school matriculation exams with flying colors, applied to the then
> classified Army TALPIOT program which took the top 1/10th of 1% of high
> school graduates and got one of the highest scores, opted out, studied
> at a major yeshiva gedola in Jerusalem, got smicha and today is a rav in
> Israel.
(http://www.ottmall.com/mj_ht_arch/v34/mj_v34i06.html#CBC)
and it also occurred to me that a paper we wrote 19 years ago (on the neurology
of 2nd language learning) may also be relevant:
Joshua Backon, Benjamin Negeris, Dennis Kurzon and Hanna Amit-chochavi:
A Straight nasal septum and right unilateral hypertrophied inferior nasal
turbinate, a very rare anatomical phenomenon, in skilled language
translators: Relevance to anomalous dominance, brain hemisphericity and
second language acquisition. (International Journal of Neuroscience 1991,
Vol.58, No. 3-4, pp. 157-163)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Akiva Miller <kennethgmiller@...>
Date: Thu, Oct 14,2010 at 08:01 AM
Subject: Christians and Moslems
Ira Bauman (MJ 59#53) asked:
> Issues of shituf and the trinity aside, why aren't we embracing
> Protestantism and Islam as the endpoints of the prophetic vision?
> ...
> If other religions are monotheistic and not engaged in disgusting
> behaviors why must we demonize them?
In the case of Protestantism, I think the answer is that we *can't* set "issues
of shituf and the trinity aside". Idolatry is too objectionable. Even if some
forms of Protestantism are okay for non-Jews, our loyalty to HaShem demands that
we stay far away from it ourselves.
As for Islam, however, that is a classically pure monotheism. Our only objection
there is to some of their beliefs. For example, we disagree with their belief
that the Torah is a corrupted form of The Word Of G-d and that their scripture
is the true version. We believe that they are mistaken, but that doesn't make
them out to be idolaters, and this is not something we would demonize them over.
If modern Jewry does demonize Islam, I suspect that it is not because of their
religious beliefs, but because of their political and military actions. Perhaps
someone older than me can offer an opinion: Is it possible that prior to the
rise of terrorism in recent decades, maybe we saw Moslems more as cousins than
we do today?
Akiva Miller
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Alex Heppenheimer <aheppenh@...>
Date: Thu, Oct 14,2010 at 10:01 AM
Subject: Christians and Moslems
In MJ 59#53, Ira Bauman <irabauman1@...> wrote:
> The nevi'im often talk about a time when the nations will recognize the One
> True G-d. We say* aleinu* and *al kein nekaveh* every day and confirm that
> goal. We are to be an *or lagoyim,* a light unto the nations and lead the
> way to this lofty goal*.
> What do we envision the world to be like when this endpoint is reached? Do
> we see throngs of people hanging out outside our shuls wishing they were
> Jews? Of course not. There is no obligation for them to adopt our
> practices, just our monotheism. As difficult as it would be for us to
> practice our monotheism without a framework of ritual and practice, it would
> be unreasonable to assume others would.
> In our day, much of the world practices monotheism. The structures that
> they created to allow them to do so are Christianity and Islam. Issues of
> shituf and the trinity aside, why aren't we embracing Protestantism and
> Islam as the endpoints of the prophetic vision? The halachic issues raised
> over the centuries may be just measures enacted to distance ourselves from
> these forms of monotheism when ours is the only one that we are to adhere
> to.
> Joshua was not asked to slaughter all the idolatrous inhabitants of Eretz
> Yisrael, only the ones steeped in cruel and abominable practices. If other
> religions are monotheistic and not engaged in disgusting behaviors why must
> we demonize them?
In a nutshell, because while they are monotheistic (Islam) or at least lay claim
to being so (Christianity), these religions have also severely distorted basic
ideas of Judaism - including the idea of respecting us as that "or lagoyim."
Rambam (Laws of Kings 11:4, uncensored editions) writes:
"...Can there be a greater stumbling block than Christianity? All the prophets
spoke of Mashiach as the redeemer of Israel and their savior who would gather
their dispersed and strengthen their observance of the mitzvot. In contrast,
Christianity caused the Jews to be slain by the sword, their remnants to be
scattered and humbled, the Torah to be altered, and the majority of the world to
err and serve a god other than the Lord. [Rambam is here being consistent with
his position that shittuf, belief in the trinity, is out-and-out idolatry for
non-Jews too.]
"Nevertheless... ultimately, all the deeds of Jesus of Nazareth and that
Ishmaelite who arose after him will only serve to prepare the way for Mashiach's
coming and the improvement of the entire world, motivating the nations to serve
God together.... How will this come about? The entire world has already become
filled with the mention of Mashiach, Torah, and mitzvot. These matters have been
spread to the furthermost islands, to many stubborn-hearted nations. They
discuss these matters and the mitzvot of the Torah, saying: 'These mitzvot were
true, but were already negated in the present age and are not applicable for all
time.' Others say: 'Implied in the mitzvot are hidden concepts that can not be
understood simply. The Mashiach has already come and revealed those hidden truths.
"When the true Messianic king will arise and prove successful, his position
becoming exalted and uplifted, they will all return and realize that their
ancestors endowed them with a false heritage, and that their prophets and
ancestors caused them to err."
So it is true that the non-Jewish "Abrahamic" religions are better than what
came before them. But by no means are they, or can they be, "the endpoints of
the prophetic vision" - and to paraphrase Ramban's expression during the
Disputation at Barcelona, "woe to the world if that's what it would look like
when Mashiach comes."
The ideal situation is indeed that they should "practice our monotheism without
a framework of ritual and practice." Indeed, Rambam (ibid. 10:9) writes that
Noachides, who keep their Seven Laws, "are not to be allowed [when Jews have the
power to do so, obviously] to originate a new religion or create mitzvot for
themselves based on their own decisions; they may either become righteous
converts and accept all the mitzvot, or retain their statutes without adding or
detracting from them." If they need religious practices to concretize their
monotheistic beliefs, then there are various possibilities available, including
sacrifices (not only in the rebuilt Temple, but even nowadays, anywhere they
want - Rambam, Laws of the Practices of the Offerings 19:16, from Zevachim 116b)
and prayer; they certainly don't need, and indeed are forbidden to practice some
of, the trappings of Judaism. But by the same token, the religious rituals and
theology of Christianity and Islam are, from a Torah point of view, at best
unnecessary and at worst false.
Kol tuv,
Alex
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Stuart Wise <Smwise3@...>
Date: Wed, Oct 13,2010 at 10:01 PM
Subject: Left-over korbanot
I overheard a conversation that questioned the halacha of an animal that
was designated for sacrifice that can no longer be used must be let out to
pasture to die. The question was whether this means letting the animal live
out its life, or just stop feeding it until it dies of starvation. One of the
conversants asked how could it be the latter, when that would constitute
tzaar baalei chaim (causing pain to living creatures).
Any elucidation?
S. Wise
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Thu, Oct 14,2010 at 12:01 PM
Subject: Lo Yishama al Picha (It shall not be heard through you)
Alexander Seinfeld <seinfeld@...> wrote (MJ 59#53):
> There are some who specifically write the name of the month instead of the
> secular number whenever possible, and when impossible write in small
> letters "tav ayin" (ta'arich akum = gentile date).
I have never heard of writing the letters "tav ayin" but I have seen (in Hebrew
documents) the addition "leminyanam" [according to their, i,e, non-Jewish, way
of counting].
Incidentally one way of minimising this problem is to avoid wherever
possible writing the year number in full e.g. '10 for the current Gregorian
year. This usually does not cause any confusion but avoids accepting their
count explicitly.
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Orrin Tilevitz <tilevitzo@...>
Date: Thu, Oct 14,2010 at 07:01 AM
Subject: Modern Orthodox
In a post in MJ 59#53 entitled Mezonos Bread/Motzi Cake, David Ziants wrote:
<but by the nature of being modern orthodox, he likes to look for leniences at
different times.>
In another post a few days ago (I couldn't find it), someone wrote that "modern
Orthodox" people shower on yom tov.
I am not sure that either of these statements is correct. While certainly the
yeshivish, litvish black hat crowd (that is not the same as charedim) look for
stringencies, the position that one does not do so is not the same as looking
for leniencies. And the position that mezonos rolls are a fiction is just one of
several instances I can think of where at least a portion of Modern Orthodoxy
has adopted a more stringent position than the opposition. Others include
sitting in the sukkah on shemini atzeret, not relying on "heimishe" hashgachot,
the position that women are obligated to daven and be conversant in Jewish
texts, and the position that the kashrus of a person who violates secular law is
suspect. Also, the main MO rabbinical organization has been far quicker to
censure or eject members who engage in halachically questionable practices than
one charedi rabbinical organization I can think of. It is also historically true
that chasidim looked for leniencies.
Certainly, I have heard the term "modern orthodox" used in certain black-hat
circles in a pejorative sense, for people who call themselves Orthodox but
engage in halachically questionable practices. But I am not sure I'd call these
people, who engage in the practices that these black-hatters denigrate,
Orthodox, any more than black hatters who engage in halachically questionable
practices.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Chana Luntz <Chana@...>
Date: Thu, Oct 14,2010 at 04:01 AM
Subject: Prohibition of entering a church
Frank Silbermann writes (MJ 59#53) in response to my post (MJ 59#51):
>> (ii) is offered on the altar (and is considered a re-enactment of
>> Jesus' supposed original sacrifice in sacrificing his life analogous to
>> the lamb offered as korbanos in the Beis HaMikdash);
>> ...
>> (iv) it is then eaten by those participating in the service as
>> analogous to the way the priests in our temple ate from the sacrifices.
>
> I don't think these points are relevant. The issue is whether the
> bread and wine are being worshiped, not whether they are being used in
> worship.
>
> As an analogy, it was a sin for the Israelites to worship a calf, but
> it was not a sin to offer one on the alter.
I think you are missing my point. It is only a sin not to offer a calf on
the altar *if and only if* the offering is made to HaShem. It is
unquestionably a sin to offer a calf (or anything else) as an offering to an
idol. If, indeed, the Christian conception of what they are offering to is
halachically deemed idolatrous, then they are making offerings to an idol
which is indeed a sin, and the offerings should be forbidden (if they are of
the kind offered in the Beis HaMikdash). Only if what they are offering to
is not deemed idolatrous, would what is offered seem not to fall within this
category and be permitted for benefit for a Jew.
Regards
Chana
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Eitan Fiorino <afiorino@...>
Date: Thu, Oct 14,2010 at 01:01 PM
Subject: Prohibition of entering a church
In MJ 59#53, Frank Silbermann wrote/asked:
> Chana Luntz <Chana@...> wrote (MJ 59#51):
>
>> But you don't need to know an awful lot about Christianity to know
>> that the central point of the Catholic mass is the bringing of wine
>> and bread in a procedure that:
>>
>> (i) is then considered by them to turn the wine and bread into the
>> body and blood of Jesus;
>
> I think I see your point. If Christians believe Jesus is G-d
> and worship him, and if Catholics believe that the bread and
> wine become his body and blood, can we therefore conclude
> that Catholics are worshiping bread and wine?
It would be inaccurate to say that Catholics worship the bread and wine. These
are used in ritual and indeed are incorporated into the liturgy and the mass,
but are not actually objects of worship. In general Catholics distinguish
between "veneration" and "worship" - Catholics and Eastern Orthodox Christians
would describe themselves as venerating, for example, their various icons, and
not as worshiping them (although this distinction may be lost on some laity).
The 2nd Council of Nicea (787 CE) declared, in reference to images of Jesus and
saints:
"The more frequently they are seen in representational art, the more are those
who see them drawn to remember and long for those who serve as models, and to
pay these images the tribute of salutation and respectful veneration. Certainly
this is not the full adoration in accordance with our faith, which is properly
paid only to the divine nature, but it resembles that given to the figure of the
honoured and life-giving cross, and also to the holy books of the gospels and to
other sacred cult objects."
As a policy statement this is pretty clear - icons and such are not to be
worshiped as possessing divinity, but are to be treated with great respect and
ought to be used as tools for increasing religious devotion.
The use of icons has always been controversial both the Western and Eastern
Church and there were regular outbreaks of iconoclasm, and iconoclasts played an
important role in the Protestant Reformation. Of course, the reformers were
also opposed to the concept of transubstantiation.
-Eitan
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Leah Aharoni <leah25@...>
Date: Thu, Oct 14,2010 at 05:01 AM
Subject: Secular use of Hebrew in the Diaspora
Recently, I was surprised to come across Polish and Lithuanian
correspondence and wedding invitations circa 1920-1930 written in Hebrew (I
would have expected them to be in Yiddish).
I am looking for similar documents from before 1900 for my research of
secular use of Hebrew in Diaspora Jewish communities. Also, if anyone has
access to statistics about Hebrew literacy in the Diaspora (either Ashkenazi
or Sephardic) for any period between 12th and 19th century, I would very
much appreciate hearing about it.
Best,
Leah Aharoni
AQText Translation Services
Phone: Israel - 972-72-2124355
US line - 201-203-7233
Mobile: 972-52-6852571
Email: <mailto:<leah25@...> leah25@017.net.il
Website: <http://www.AQText.com> www.AQText.com
Blog: <http://www.ingathered.wordpress.com> www.ingathered.com
Twitter: @leah_aharoni
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Carl Singer <carl.singer@...>
Date: Thu, Oct 14,2010 at 07:01 AM
Subject: seeking leniencies / seeking stringencies (was: Shower on second day o
Akiva Miller in (MJ 59:53) continues the discussion re: showering on 2nd day
and includes:
> 2) If even a tiny bit of chametz gets mixed into a food during Pesach, it
> cannot be ignored. But on the eighth day, according to Mishna Brura 467:44,
> these rules are relaxed a bit.
> [I have often wondered if a man who makes use of these leniencies (on the
> grounds that "perhaps today is not really Yom Tov") ought to be penalized
> by having to put his tefillin on (on the grounds that "perhaps today is not
> really Yom Tov"). My guess is that such a penalty would have been adopted
> at some point, if not for tefillin's status as a muktzah object.]
The above may not be the best example, but since it is at hand: there are
some by dint of their personality and / or training to seem to drill deeply for
the leniencies of life and of observance, and (of course) there are some who go
the opposite way. {In one direction we've called it "frumer than thou"}
I find phenomenon on both the individual and congregational / community
level. Comments?
Carl Singer
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Sam Gamoran <SGamoran@...>
Date: Thu, Oct 14,2010 at 04:01 AM
Subject: Shower on second day yom tov
Akiva Miller <kennethgmiller@...> wrote (MJ 59#53):
> Ben Katz (MJ 59:52) wrote:
>
>> There is at least one other difference between 1st and 2nd day yom tov that
>> I can recall, related to the above issue: If one wishes to ...
> [I have often wondered if a man who makes use of these leniencies (on the
> grounds that "perhaps today is not really Yom Tov") ought to be penalized by
> having to put his tefillin on (on the grounds that "perhaps today is not really
> Yom Tov"). My guess is that such a penalty would have been adopted at some
> point, if not for tefillin's status as a muktzah object.]
While this "tefillin penalty" might be conceivable for the last days of Yom Tov
(8th day Pesach, 2nd day Shavuot, 9th day Simchat Torah) it would not be
appropriate for the second day of either Pesach or Sukkot for those who don't
put on tefillin the whole week of Chol Hamoed. At this point it gets much too
complicated to remember which days this custom applies so the whole thing would
be dropped.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ben Katz <BKatz@...>
Date: Thu, Oct 14,2010 at 01:01 PM
Subject: Shower on second day yom tov
Akiva Miller <kennethgmiller@...> wrote (MJ 59#53):
> Ben Katz (MJ 59#52) wrote:
>> There is at least one other difference between 1st and 2nd day yom tov that
>> I can recall, related to the above issue: If one wishes to ...
> There are *many* other differences.
> [I have often wondered if a man who makes use of these leniencies (on the
> grounds that "perhaps today is not really Yom Tov") ought to be penalized by
> having to put his tefillin on (on the grounds that "perhaps today is not really
> Yom Tov"). My guess is that such a penalty would have been adopted at some
> point, if not for tefillin's status as a muktzah object.]
A better question is how tefillin, which is d'orayta (from the Torah) can be
abolished by yom tov sheni shel galut, which is d'rabanan (from the rabbis)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 59 Issue 54
