Reb Eliezer

We must give much credit to Noach for not being influenced from his surroundings. Maybe, that is why his tamimness is being questioned as he avoided mixing with people similar to his grandfather Chanoch.

I heard that they were tzadikim as they both fed their families and Noach also the animals.

Ben Gurion might have been a rasha but smart as he realized that the state will not otherwise materialize.

So what should we say now about the state when they throwing aside the decision of the orthodox?

BTW, I just noticed a Targum Yonasan arguing with the Targum Onkelos what the meaning of ערומים is. The Targum Yonasan translates Adam and Chava being חכימים, wise rather than unclothed. Maybe we find that both are true. In Samuel (19,24) we see that when Shaul got mixed up with the neviim and started to prophesize, he shed his clothes. The Redak explains that the clothing is a hinderance for the use of the spiritual mind. So for Adam and Chava because of their high intellect of wisdom, the clothing was a hinderance and unnecessary until after the eating of eitz hadaas where there spiritual mind got damaged.

As a joke, maybe when one talks in the middle of davening, we say ‘nu’ which is no good.

In the News: did the young man who refused money from inheritance consider that the people who made the money were a tinuk shenishbah?

The gemora in Meseches Chulin (139,2) says that Haman’s punishment is evident as Adam Harishon’s by the Eitz Hadaas.

The Chasam Sofer explains that by Haman’s seuda they could have filled themselves up ahead of time. The seuda would have been an achila gasa, overeating shlo kaderech achiloson, not the normal way of consumption, where accumulation does not apply as when we are eating again is in an allowed way. Since they did not do that, they were responsible. However, the Chasam Sofer explains that this seuda was made by Achashverus as a celebration for not building the Beis hamikdash, so attending was a admission of a’z where even a tiny amount was also forbidden. Therefore, according the Meharshal in Makus 24, shlo kaderech was also forbidden which makes Haman responsible for forcing them as the above advice was not possible. Similarly, by Adam Harishon, eating from the eitz hadaas was a question of emunah bordering on a’z, so a small amount, as described above, was also forbidden and therefore he got punished.

Repeating from an other topic:

It says ולקחתם לכם ביום הראשון, so the Midrash says ראשון לחשבון עוונות, the Chasan Sofer explains that it provides forgiveness for the first sin.
Adam Harishon thought that only the tree is forbidden as the tastes of it and the fruit differ. He wanted to see if the fruits of other trees taste like the tree. As the earth sinned by changing the taste of the tree and fruit, he found that they tasted different. Therefore, he thought that the eitz hadaas will be the same but it was an esrug where the fruit and the tree did taste the same. So we take an esrug which providing forgiveness for the earth where it did not sin and Adam Harishon. He would have never sinned if the earth would not have sinned as he would have realized that they taste different.