Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
The first Siman of SHulchan Aruch seems to suggest that not.
Why all this overhead? Pickup your email through Telnet and avoid all trouble.
List
Retr 1
Please explain why you say that the numbers are equal. Between 1 and 2 you have all those numbers of between 0 and 1, and this goes on ad infinitum (v’ad bichlal).
Writer, if the intent would be that the person should be a straight Meilitz, then for a male we would say Meilitz Yashar, not Yosher. Anyhow, once a person’s life is over it’s too late to straighten them out.
That said, I better get going…
It is rarely pure aluminum. The other stuff that they make the alloy from are there to give it more useable qualities. But it’s not really a question of trying to be Mevatel the iron within it (if it does). It’s rather a question of what item do we have in front of us.
Not sure why you say that. What special quality does Davar Sheyeish Bo Ruach Chayim have? When it is held by things that are Mekabel Tuma then its being an Ohel doesn’t help. Not being held up should be just as good as being held by any animal or stone. Air is also not Mekabel Tuma.
But anyhow, why do you have to come on to this? Once you are agreeing that an airplane is a Tzamid Passil it is anyhow Mafsik because of its size.
I was just looking over that Tosafos in Eiruvin 31. He quotes the Rashba that holds that an Ohel Zaruk is only a problem when it is being held by a person or Keilim. So now, perhaps according to this, an airplane does not have the problem of Ohel Zaruk!
The next question is, what about a bus? First of all there might not be a Tefach all over and the Tuma can enter. But that aside, are the tires part of the bus or are the considered separate Keilim and render the bus an Ohel Zaruk. This leads us back to the Sugya of Muchni.
Sam, it is only Chotzetz if it is an Ohel or a Tzamid Passil. It’s not an Ohel so I guess you are considering it a Tzamid Passil. If it works for the airplane it works for the bag.
We don’t rely on this Hetter when it comes to Tevilas Keilim. Also, Chazal always use the term Barzel, which suggests that it is a rule for metal. If there is a difference it would be regarding aluminum and other earth metals, being that they are a different type of metal than those mentioned in the Torah.
The question then becomes, what about alloys? If iron is mixed in, to what extent does it matter? Do we go after Ikkar and Tafel, or Rov?
Sometimes that’s the reason. If you do it yourself you’ll see that it is often similar to B, you are thinking and hoping that the child just open the mouth and it should all go in neatly. People do it even when the kid is not facing them directly.
DY, I see now that it is obvious that the person being Zarul doesn’t help, since the Gemara applies this to the moving wagon. He is moving in the wagon, just as he’s moving in the airplane. Obviously, we have to be Mechalek between Tuma going over him and him going over the Tuma. The first is through Ohel and the second is Magga.
I have one more Hetter up my sleeve. The airplane itself is a Tzamid Passil, since it is bigger than 40 Saah, so it isn’t Tammei, and it is sealed. The only question I have is that although a Tzamid Passil is allowed to have an opening, that is only a break, but not its actual opening. Since the airplane has openings that it depends on and it gets its compressed air from the engines, perhaps it is not a valid Tzamid Passil.
What’s funny is when they say, “She should be a Melitza Yeshara.” Do women have a different Yashrus then men? Probably, what they really mean to say is, Melitzas Yosher.
Popa is right. You are supposed to check with your local astronomer before committing.
Why do you open your mouth when you are trying to feed a child?
And, did you ever notice the eyes of a riveted crowd when the speaker opens his eyes wide?
What motivates someone to clap during Shmona Esrei?
“I also don’t have an opinion on whether the Maharal was able to create one. Why must one believe that he was able to create one? It seems that everyone here believes that one must believe that.“
Not that one must believe that, just that we do believe that. One must only believe that it is possible by someone, like Betzalel, or Rava. This is unless you nutralize the words of our sages by spraying ‘dream’.
DY, The Cohen becomes Taamei through being Maahil, which is a kind of Magga. If he is not being Maahil on the Kever how does he become Tamei through it?
Zdad, Chosid mean someone doing something that is not the Din. Chosid Shotte is someone doing more than the Din requires while losing out what he is required. Yarei Shamayim is someone who follows Halacha, to the T. There is no such title as Yarei Shamayim Shotte, but there is a title as Boor Yerei Chet, which is someone who doesn’t know the Halacha.
Calling something extreme doesn’t make it unnecessary. Besides, if you think about it, many Halachos are extreme, it’s just that you are used to them. Isn’t it extreme to build a Succah and eat (and sleep) there for seven days? You wouldn’t refrain from putting on Tefillin if you are on a 24 hour flight — which can make headlines. Hilchos Nida are really exreme stuff and so is Shabbos.
Those jokes about him having some highly contagious disease, what if they were true? Would it also be extreme or I’m sure you can find some undergraduate doctor that theorized that the low pressure of the cabin will inhibit the bacteria from flowing about.
It’s not like there’s a mitzva to wear a bag. A situation came up where this was the only viable solution. Funny situations bring funnier solutions. What if you were invited to a dinner with the queen and they change seats for every course, so that you get to meat as many peole as possible, but since you keep Kosher and you had to bring along your own dishes you land up walking around the hall carrying dishes? Chillel Hashem or Kiddush Hashem?
There is no Mitzva to carry dishes, but a funny situation came up and tested you. Even though it is embarrassing, you gotta do what you gotta do.
What do I have waiting for me if I come to visit?
So, it’s possible that the plane is a problem for the Cohen, and a bag might help, but no way is that the solution?
Remember, the guy didn’t ask for his picture to be taken, and he wasn’t holding by travelling by boat, and this helps.
The only thing that I still don’t understand is what I asked earlier, if a bird carrying a Kezayis Mes is not Maahil, bacause it is an Ohel Zaruk, why is the Cohen, when he is Zaruk, considered Maahil?
Sam, a Tzamid Passil is with any substance that is Chotzetz from Tuma. Plastic is not a Keli, it might be Pshutei Keili, if it was a sheet and not a bag, and it might not be Mekabel Tuma at all, like Limey said.
The question I have is that an Ohel Zaruk is not an Ohel. We know this by a bird carrying Tuma, that it is not Maahil. Why don’t we apply the same to the Kohen himself, that he is not being Maahil on the Tuma.
As far as other places, this problem is only where we know for a fact that he is flying directly over Jewish graves.
Ad Larakiya is a good theorhetical discussion, sofar. There isn’t much to go by so we can’t really be Meikel with Dimyonos (???? ???? ????? ???? ????). But we can have fun speculating if the planet has a planetary Techum, perhaps a Mehalech of 500 years. This is 10 Parsa a day multiplied by 365*500. That’s 7,300,000 Mil, whatever that comes out to.
Another possibility is as long as you feel the pull of Earth’s gravity. Or perhaps from when you start to see the world as a Kadur. Maybe we can draw the line at the level where the rocket has to come at the critical angle, since that is like a layer, the Kipa.
Another thing to keep in mind is that while many scientists feel survival of the fittest and time explain the creation, it does not explain lack of creation.
Design doesn’t only mean that the world and creations have what they need, it also means that whatever they have, they need. There is no scientific or logical explanation for that fact that we don’t have carrot-like protrusions, that aren’t decoration, protection, storage, or for other important functions.
It is taken for granted that if an animal has a funny looking limb it serves a purpose. Why don’t unnecessary limbs just develope? Why don’t humans have useless wings under our feet?
Often, liturature refer to Nature almost as a conscious entity. This is because when you observe nature, the conscious designer stares you in the face. People also feel instinctively that they were put places for a purpose. Those who don’t want to acknowledge Someone in charge refer to how Fate put them there, or Nature, or the Universe, or the General Consciousness.
Since you asked for one sentence, use the first. Back it up with the rest.
What was called the trap question is answered by the concept of Mechuyav Metzius. Matter begins somewhere and is set in motion by a beginning. The core, conscious essential existence doesn’t have these requirements.
This is the concept that the Rambam, Chovas Halevavos, and philosophers’ arguments are based on.
The Abravanel points out that the Nissim of the Torah are the best proof. The Torah seems to imply the same.
Many people see that before you.
Actually it translates to Arf Arf! — which means, “Hi, I exist and I’m here.”
My my. I see before me what a great Gadol said of someone, “If he would be in the woods he would fight with the trees.”
Surely you exist but not in Old Man’s dream.
If the end result is the exact sound sound of an instrument then it is the same thing. Reb Moshe talks about singing not about instrumental music produced by other means.
kgh, you are comparing apples to velcros. It says that what the king sent oout cannot be rescinded. A royal decree is where the Achashdarpnim run and announce the new law. A punishment is not a law, it might be a ruling. There is absolutely no reason to say that he didn’t reserve the right to take back someone that he kicked out. After all, he killed someone that he appointed to high office.
All the Nissim in the Torah are proof that the one who said they will happen, did them, and controls the world. This is the reason they were performed, to be a proof of Hashem. (Taken from Mifalos Elokim of the Abrabanel)
I wouldn’t quite call that a decree. It’s banishment. What it says is that what the king sent out can’t be rescinded.
Sam, he wasn’t referring to the Sefer of the Ramak, was he? I don’t know what he saw, but he definitely wasn’t complaining about a Zohar Hakadosh.
But again, where do you find that he had a problem with Nissim? He held Malachim are not related to the physical and therefore cannot be seen. This is why he explains all such visions to be dream state. But, where do you find that he had a problem with Hashem performing Nissim for His close ones, as in fruits growing out of a tree, raining on particular spots that were pointed out by a person, being saved from falling off a high roof, or knowing a strangers name?
The Rambam did not believe in Kishuf or Sheidim perhaps, and calls such references Daas Yachid, but someone who can’t comprehend a Ness is not based on the Rambam.
Achashveirosh actually regretted what he did to her. Why couldn’t he simply undo it?
Or like I suggested, he didn’t know about it and it was not widely known amongst us.
The Gemara doesn’t use the word Golem. It started at some point. True, he doesn’t say it was the Maharal. But I am showing that the story was around. And, as others have said in the past, not necessarily was it a well known fact. Those that bumped into it knew about it.
The question is, how would the Meshumad know how it was made?
You shouldn’t comparee what you found in a book to a book itself. You are saying that not everything printed is true, and I am am saying that a book with an author was authored by that author. I didn’t see anyone questioning its authorship. All online articles seemed to be aware of the Shlangenbald.
Old books are constantly used as ‘documented proof’. I never noticed the requests to see the original manuscripts. Do you ask, how do we know the Maharal wrote Be’er Hagolah and Derech Chaim? Did you see the manuscripts?
Torah613, that is step 1. But you have to reach out and explixitly express the feeling in a way that will go over.
For the sake of the survey, I gravitate towards discussions and stories.
When someone is near you, you see him as being the same size as someoe standing ten feet away. However, your eye actually sees him 40 times larger. What you call seeing is actually ‘knowing’ based on sight.
It’s on Matzav, I think.
In the Moreh he writes that a Malach made the donkey talk. He interprets visions of Malachim as dream state but not the Nisim of Tanach. Where does he negate the ability of a Tzaddik to bring about a miracle? Did he re-interpret Rava bringing rain out of season, or Rebbe Shimon Bar Yochai’s many Nisim when the Gemara called them Nisim?
Truthfully, the fact that he rejects any mention of magic and astrology as a Daas Yachid, when we find quotes from the whole range of Tanain and Amoraim, and never a dissenting voice, makes it sound like an apologetic approach. This is probably why, as you said, it didn’t really last. But it gave a handle to those who can’t accept the straightforward approach, so that they can remain Frum and dismiss these uncomfortable parts as Daas Yachid.
Sam, not with a Kol, since others will think you are talking and they will talk. It is also advised to focus on what the Baal Tefilla is saying.
By the way, did anyone ever hear of the Ibn Ezra’s Golem?
It is a Raaya that the story was around then. It is also a Raaya that Reb Zalman didn’t know of it. That is why I said that perhaps it was only known to non-Jews.
Perhaps it was a rumor that the Jews spread in order to scare their neighbors. Perhaps the Meshumad was referring to the Golem of Reb Adam Baal Shem, or Reb Avigdor. Perhaps the peasants decided they saw one coming from the Maharal’s house. There are many possibilities, but the story was around then.
I can’t do better than take a Sefer’s word that it was written when it was. It says it was written in ??? ???”?, which is six years after the Maharal was Niftar.
By the way, did you notice that hollow proof, that the Maharal never mentioned it in any of his Sefarim!? ??? ??? ????, ??? ???! Is that what you were expecting to find? However, the fact that it shows up suddenly at one time, all over, does pose a difficult question.
But the daytime Tefilos aren’t for Daf Yomi. People usually bring piles of other Sefarim to their place for that.
I was referring to those who fight tooth and nail, not to someone who happens to think it didn’t happen.
What was printed in 1960 is a Likut of old Sefarim. I happen to have a copy of this particular Sefer of Reb Zalman Aufhaussen. It doesn’t say that it was a live debate. Read the intro. A guy Samuel (which Reb Zalman spells in an interesting way) Brenz made a book called Shlangenbald and Reb Zalman Tzvi put out this Kutres as a retort. You can look up these people on wikipedia.
By the way, how do you prove something didn’t happen? Some of what people consider proofs, I consider a joke, as I mentioned earlier. So, all we have is tradition. This, I won’t knock away with a joke.
WIY, why not? I just don’t think that applies to Kol Haposhet, at all. Kol Haposhet Yad is about being Marbe Simcha.
You have a stone frying pan?
Zdad, quite the contrary, the Tzaros that are forgotten should have a day to remember them. The stuff that we are living through don’t need reminnders.
I believe I explained the difference very clearly between Tzom Gedalya and Talmidei Rebbe Akiva, and the Spanish expulsion, crusaders — which we don’t keep anymore since it was a local thing, the 1902 progrom, and the holocaust.
And yes, a day not being set by Rabbanim, like the rest of the set days, is an excellent reason for it not to be sanctified.
Nobody can judge the survivor, nor do we tell him to be quiet. But, nor can we set policy based on someone’s emotion. That person subscribes to the Yom Hashoa idea because of his background, so obviously he views anyone who doesn’t as not respecting the concept of remembering him and his loss. Do you think there are no Chareidi survivors that you can turn this into Chareidi vs. Survivors?
Talk about remembering, it is Artscroll who has a whole division on the holocaust. Our children read about it all the time, not just one day. And, as Rabbaim said, in camp Tisha B’av was full of holocaust lectures and presentations.
Like many other topics, all the arguments are really based on the initial attitude. In truth, had this been an American concept, it would have been more respected. Most issues in EY stem from the fact that the government is looked at as Jews and judged from that angle. American Chareidim often view the Israeli government no different from our own, so we don’t have this perspective as much.
WIY, the parts that get left over can be done during Lecha Dodi.
ShalomToYou, I saw a clip of Reb Chaim Keniyevsky singing that tune. As I pointed out in the thread on that topic, the words were probably written for that tune.
Sam, the Rambam had no problem with Neviim performing Nisim. I don’t recall anything against the ability to perform a Ness through Sheimos, either. He definitely believed in a non-natural existence, and he believed in conscious stars that affect us. He clearly writes that a Malach made Bilam’s donkey talk.
He also held that Nevua is not bound to the Geula, since he was against figuring out the date of the Geula while he gave a date for the return of Nevua close to his day.
So why would it be out of the park to say that a Chasid, who is Davuk in Hashem and Tzuros Elyonos (as he writes of a Navi) can bring about wondrous things?
http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=2852&st=&pgnum=174
Look at the second column. This Sefer was printed 6 years after the Maharal was Niftar. This is why I mentioned that perhaps the non-Jews knew about it while we didn’t. We definitely see that the story was around back in the day.
Read the next paragraph for something even more strange, for it seems to be a first hand account of a common phenomenon.
Nitpicker, I don’t either have much invested in the Golem, however I find it silly when people fight tooth and nail that there wasn’t a Golem. Then they say, “Oh, I believe he could have”, while refusing to accept the possibility that he did.
My main reason for accepting it is the tradition, which predates Reb Yidel Rosenberg by many years. He did a great disservice to this tradition by putting out the Niflaos Maharal, although it is possible that he meant no harm, and just wanted to put out a fun book. I once read that he referred to these books as novels. I can’t say the same for the Hagadda, but that’s a different story.
As to the Original question, the Maharal writes that a Golem can’t talk. The Gemara says that the one that Rava created didn’t talk.
A side note, the Maharal explains many Gemaros in a non-literal way. This Gemara was not one of them. The Gemara and Medrash speak in a language that has to be understood, but not that what they say is meant to be dismissed whenever it is not strict Halacha.
In our language we have the same thing. We often speak in metaphors, besides many cliches. If it is not easily discerned when you are speaking straightforward and when you are speaking metaphor then you are not a good speaker.
Nitpicker, the Golem legend is way older than Reb Yiddel Rosenberg. The auther of Frankenstine said she got the idea from the Golem story. It is famously mentioned in the Bnei Yisaschar that the Maharal used the Sefer Yetzira. There are a few other stories about the Golem.
One of the famous “proofs” that he didn’t (usually a great undertaking) make one is that “his Talmid Reb Dovid Ganz” doesn’t mention it. I don’t know who ever made him a close Talmid, if there were any. Does he ever quote a Pshat from the Maharal? Even the Tosafos Yom Tov, who is often called a Talmid of the Maharal, doesn’t quote anything from the Maharal that is not from the Sefarim.
Second of all, his entry on the Maharal is in the Jewish year 252, when the Maharal came back to Prague to be the Rav.
True, we can’t trace the story back. Some say that perhaps the Golem of Reb Eliyahu Baal Shem, which we know about, was confused with the Maharal, since Reb Eliyahu Baal Shem also lived in Prague eventualy.
Perhaps it was only known to the non-Jews, who had personal experience.