by Joel Rich
For my B-I-L who liked this issue better than Tachanun. Here are 2 viewpoints on the 2 people in the desert issue where a third party has the water.
It seems that if someone has water and two thirsty people are in front of him, this too would be dependent on the argument; according to Ben-Petura he gives both equally and both will die and even if he gave one of the two, that one would have to split it with the other. And according to R’Akiva, he can give it to either one. And even though for the giver, there is no situation of “his life comes first”, even so since the one getting it will save himself, the giver can give it to one.
It seems that if Reuven has a jug of water, and both Shimon & Levi are thirsty, all would agree that you give an equal amount to both and they will both die, since if he gives it to Shimon, Levi will die now and Shimon keep the water for tomorrow.
Questions: 1) Is R’Chaim based on the understanding that R’Akiva’s “your life first” is the exception to the general rule? What is the principle behind the general rule? (me – who says your blood is redder?); 2) According to R’Chaim, if Reuven gave the water to Shimon, is it now a case for Shimon of “your life 1st?” If so, how does this inform on the case where it’s just Shimon and Levi and Shimon steals the water from Levi?; 3) According to the Chazon Ish, what does HKB”H want Reuvain to do (split or not, and how does he choose if he wants to give it to one – based on the mishna in Horiyot or coin flip or whim?
“Mr., is this fish fresh?” Well done (as opposed to sushi?) shiur tracing the worms in fish skin issue from Talmudic sources to shulchan aruch to 1970’s/80’s (comes around like Haley’s Comet?) to present day.
Parallel to other seeming torah/science “conflicts” (e.g. spontaneous generation) and how halacha approaches these issues.
Personally, I prefer the symmetric approach to halacha (i.e. call ‘em consistently as you see ‘em whether l’chumrah or l’kula). Funny that R’Slifkin has a letter to R’Belsky post up recently!
1st in a series. Three mitzvot involved in lost objects and practical applications and exceptions. (Question – does returning a “generation lost in space” qualify?)
R’Ozarowski’s call for help from YUTORAH listeners to understand the historical background of a R’Moshe Tshuva yielded the following link from a semi-alert, old fogey.
Does geirut work on a snapshot basis (i.e. it’s yes or no at the split second of conversion, or can later events inform on the conversion?) [another “Daddy” issue – the whole space/time continuum in halacha] The Rambam’s famous unclear section on the issue. Differing opinions discussed (both as to the actions of the ger and of the beit din).
“Kulah” – can make a bracha on seeing a queen (no snickering please). Rabbi who forgot sfirah one night can count with a bracha in the shul future nights due to a kavod hatorah.
“Chumrah” – driving is not Tzanuah nor is public speaking or singing zmirot or seeing a male ob/gyn.
“Actuarial” – it’s not a lack of bitachon to save for retirement or buy life insurance (but “special” people can rely on bitachon?!)
Good review of the general rules. Interesting insight from R’Bleich that underlying issue is treating people with lack of respect. Good discussion of the import of the talmud’s statement that embarrassing someone is akin to murder.
The halachot of selling sfarim from your personal collection (seems like shouldn’t be able to from the original sources). R’ Eisenstein – here’s the link to the R’YBS shiur on “Nosiim anachnu” – There’s more than one Baal habayit who cries when he hears this parsha being read: link
a) Hishtadlut (making our own efforts) vs b) Bitachon (it’s all up to HKB”H)
1) Rambam – heavily a) (= natural order) except for those who (almost) completely actualize their intellect to understand HKB”H; 2) Ramban – there is natural order, it would be perfect to rely on HKB”H; b) but no guarantee
Mussar approach (chovot halevavot up through R’Dessler). There is no natural order – “but myself I can’t deceive, I know it’s only make believe”. So why make any effort? - a few reasons – my favorite - so others will have free will to be deceived into believing there is a natural order.
What do you need to be able to give psak? 1) Torah knowledge; 2) factual knowledge (mitziut); 3) ability to communicate properly; 4) not bfnei rabo (in front of his rebbi) – could be due to respect or concern HKB”H won’t assist in this situation. Does this only apply to rebbi muvhak (that you learned the majority of your torah knowledge)?
We are not so concerned nowadays about answering our own questions!?
Need a combination of fear of heaven and effort/knowledge.
The study of torah as a step in increasing both Yirat Hashem (awe of HKB”H) and Ahavat Hashem (love of HKB”H). A very nice insight on the meaning of the Shimon Haamsoni story (he learned something from all the etim in the torah and then unlearned them when he got stuck on one) – a lesson in coherence.
The Klausenberger Rebbi was very active in the community (Kiryat Sanz) as well as writing many sh”ut.
Discussed here 1) Bar mitzvah boys – no tfillin prior to bar mitzvah; 2) Tfillin on chol hamoed – pre marriage the boys wear tfillin, post not! Perhaps based on seriousness that people at those ages exhibit; 3) bringing weapons into a shul (how it is ok?); 4) status of mosques in halacha.
Geirut is a transfer of Kedusha (holiness) by the beit din, assumes at the point of geirut a total commitment to following commands.
Discussion of locating the mitzvah of geirut.
R’MT defines 2 classes of geirim – 1) Kedushat Yisrael; 2) Kedushat Kahal Yisrael and some differences in rights and requirements.
Some nice stories about torah learning’s centrality. Importance of simple pshat & knowing what and when to learn.
Some of the standard source material on Kaddish transitioned into an interesting take on why Yehei Shmei Rabbah remains in Aramaic. He ties to the saying of baruch shem kvod after the churban and the angels not understanding Aramaic (don’t ask me about this) – angels see things in black and white (and immediate?). We see future (yhei shmei is reference to messianic era where all recognize HKB”H).
Good review of sources on Kol Isha (women’s voices) and specific possible exceptions to a broad based prohibition (me – “once upon a time – there was a tavern; those were the days my friend”).
2 requirements – 1) want to do good; 2) know what HKB”H wants of you. R’Asher Weiss talks of the ratzon hatorah or ratzon hashem where the key issue is to be yashar and connected to the ratzon hashem (R’AL – only through talmidei chachomim?) There are no specific directives.
Good review of the specifics of shalosh seudot:
*Rabanan of duraita
*earliest, latest, most appropriate time slot
Discussion of the parameters of haosek bmitzvah (if one is doing one mitzvah they are exempt/not bound by another). Exempt/not bound is the issue – e.g. if it’s a temporary exemption (ptur) then maybe should do make up later, if not bound (eino chayav) then not.
Discussion of why talmud torah is not subject to this rule – one possibility mitzvah is to learn when no other chiyuv.
Duality/dynamic tension between the clarity and magic/mystery of torah. (Nice illusion to creiti and pleiti representing these.)
I loved the comparison of the Brisker and scientific methods (ha to all of you who make fun of me for calling sugyot “data points”.)