Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 474

Friday, March 31 2000

• Re: Shiurim
• Re: Shiurim
• nevuah
• Re: Martial arts
• Matzah shiurim
• Shawarma B'Pesach
• Re: Chassidim and Drug Laundering. NY Times 3/29/00
• Re: shiurim
• Re: Chassidim and Drug Laundering. NY Times 3/29/00
• Pot Roast
• R. Hildesheimer
• Re: Shiurim
• Re: Pot Roast
• Yonah
• Re: Pot Roast
• matza shiurim
• Shiurim
• Re: nevuah
• Re: nevuah
• Re: Matzas Mitzva & Simcha
• Simchas Chicken?
• Re: Simchas Chicken?
• Re: Simchas Chicken?
• Re: aniyei ircha

I believe that there is a sugya either in Bavli or Yerushalmi that says the
tastes are mevatel each other, especially when one is d'orysa & one
d'rabbonon.

Sorry.

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila    ygb@aishdas.org

----- Original Message -----
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
To: Avodah <avodah@aishdas.org>
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 2:11 PM
Subject: Re: Shiurim


> I would have thought (speaking theoretically now) that it would be okay to
> count the matzah and marror of koreich toward the shiurim for motzi-matzah
> and marror -- iff you finish koreich within kidei achilas piras of
starting
> matzah.
>
> After all, those who disagree with Hillel hold that pesach matzah and
marror
> can be eaten separately -- not that they MUST be.
>
> OTOH, you need a complete shiur for koreich in order to do the zeicher
> limikdash keHillel. So why can't you just have a little bit more for the
> earlier steps. (Again, subject to time constraints. OTOH, how long does
> it take to eat that little bit?)
>
> Any flaws before I run off to my poseik with this one?
>
> -mi
>
> --
> Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 29-Mar-00: Revi'i, Shmini
> micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H
> http://www.aishdas.org                                    Rosh-Hashanah
16b
> For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         Melachim-II 23
>

One can't rely on the matzoh eaten during koreich and the rest of the
meal (eaten together with other food) to complete the shiur kzayis, 
because the taste of maror (during koreich) and other food is mevatel
the taste of matzoh. See MB O"C 475:16 based on Pesachim 115a. (Perhaps
even bedi'eved.)

Avrohom Weidberg
---------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 14:11:53 -0600
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
Subject: Re: Shiurim

I would have thought (speaking theoretically now) that it would be okay
to
count the matzah and marror of koreich toward the shiurim for
motzi-matzah
and marror -- iff you finish koreich within kidei achilas piras of
starting
matzah.

After all, those who disagree with Hillel hold that pesach matzah and
marror
can be eaten separately -- not that they MUST be.

OTOH, you need a complete shiur for koreich in order to do the zeicher
limikdash keHillel. So why can't you just have a little bit more for
the
earlier steps. (Again, subject to time constraints. OTOH, how long
does
it take to eat that little bit?)

Any flaws before I run off to my poseik with this one?

- -mi

Can someone point me to a good explanation from a hashkafa/philosophic
perspective as to why nevuah and then ruach hakodesh were taken from us?

Gershon
gershon.dubin@juno.com

The qualifier for the issur of *chovel* is (like the Rambam): *nitzayon*
or *bizayon*. The Iggrot Moshe CM II 66 discusses this with regard to the
permissibility of plastic surgery. If the chabala is "l'tovato", there's
no issur.

My guess is that studying martial arts is for the benefit of the person
(self-defense) and would be similar to the the position of a doctor who
operates and causes *chabala*. See also the Nishmat Avraham CM 420 # 1.

Josh (who started learning Ninjutsu in 1993 after witnessing an Arab
      murder a father and son on their way to shul at 05:30 in the morning)

I note that the measurement of the shiur of a kazayit that is attributed
to the bet midrash of R' Moshe Feinstein is based on grinding the matzah
and then measuring the volume of a given mass of the matzah meal.  This
measurement has various problems.  First of all, it is a bulk density
measurement and the bulk density is a function of particle size
distribution, particle shape, average particle size, and compaction.  It
is not a measure of intrinsic or true density, but is a function of the
apparatus and experimental variables.  Then how can we rely on such a
measurement?  More importantly, what is the basis for assuming that the
matzah must be crushed to get a "true" measure of its density.  Why is
it assumed that the numerous small air pockets in a matzah can not be
counted into the shiur of a kazayit?  That is the normal form of the
food item.  Must we compress a sponge cake in order to determine the
shiur of a beitza?  It is reasonable not to include large air pockets or
the space between pieces of matzah due to curvature in the shiur
estimation.  But what is the problem with taking flat pieces of matzah
(its best to do this before yom tov) and piling them up to get the size
of a large egg (this is really more like the shiur of 3 olives, but some
conservatism is necessary in order to compensate for the invariable
spaces between matzah pieces), and treating that amount of matzah as a
kazayit.  If you do the above you will find that the shiur of a kazayit
is much less than an entire hand matzah.  I can understand a distinction
between machine and hand matzah.  The latter has a much smaller air
pocket volume than the former (at least in the form of Shatzer matzot or
their equivalent).  They are also flatter (although irregular) and can
be stacked more efficiently (no ridges).  Its also a lot easier to eat
an entire machine matzah than a hand matzah.  I can, therefore, see some
logic in adopting the posted shiur for a machine matzah, but not for
hand matzot.

Yitzchok Zlochower

CSO wrote:

"Cuz I had a thought... f'teira, lamb, maror, add a little hummus, some
tehinah, viola! Shawarma!"

IIRC, sesame seeds are kitniyos - not that that would matter to the f'teira 
crowd anyway...

Meyer

In a message dated 3/30/00 9:58:52 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu writes:

<< 
 I disagree with this statement. I think it is forbidden to engage in
 behavior that may lead o Chillul Hashem even if you can theoretically
 justify it from a halachic standpoint. The people engaged in such behavior
 were not making such highfalutin' cheshbonos.
 
 Can this discussion really have any positive side to it? If so, please
 educate me. If not, move on, please! >>

R' Yosef, I know you are intelligent. So I wonder why you had trouble with 
Harry's sarcasm.
Seriously, I agree that there should be a benefit for such a distressing and 
negative story to be included on Avodah. And although I am no chareidi, it 
certainly should not be Chareidi bashing.
I think the story originally surfaced to inspire us to reflect on where as a 
society we can do more to translate our observance of Mitzvot into more 
fulfilling life for everybody. Young men brought up in the unique environment 
of Chassidut should hopefully have been immune to these kinds of influences. 
If not, were they too naive to know the evil with which they were 
associating? Did their educational system fail them in some way? Are there 
ways in which the community as whole can improve the Torah eduction system? 
At the risk of discussing social issues on Avodah, I think there is a place 
where social, educational, and spiritual ideas intersect. This story should 
be a catalyst for finding that place.

Jordan Hirsch
   

In a message dated 3/30/00 11:51:12 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
Gil.Student@citicorp.com writes:

<< I would say that what makes it difficult is the SECOND kezayis of matza 
that the
 mechaber introduces.  Add to that the kezayis for korech and that's a lot of 
 matza going down the hatch.
 
 Anyone have a good source for mechaber's extra kezayis?
  >>

Just a thought.....
I dont understand this whole thread. I love hand shmurah matza, and never 
feel burdened. The only thing I love more than Hand Shmura by itself is a 
nice k'zayis of Maror eaten with the Matza. 
Go figure.....

Jordan Hirsch



 

In a message dated 3/30/00 12:16:13 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il writes:

<< Besides Everyone needs to make a living, right? As
 > > long as you only sell drugs to Goyim.  They are
 > > animals anyway and are probably Michuyiv Misa for
 > > violating the Shiva Mitzvos Bnei Noah.
 > >
 > >
 > 
 > I disagree with this statement. 
 
 So do I. I have never heard of anyone given a heter to engage in 
 drug dealing based on it being sold "only to the goyim." 
  >>
 Um, the author was engaging in sarcasm. 

Jordan

I think the pot roast that many of us are familar with in not the Tzli 
Keder in the Shulchan Aruv Harav.

The Pot roast I am familiar with is cooked with a considerable amount of 
liquid and the resulting volume of gravy would make it impossible to be 
considered  broiled.  A regular roast that is made now days, with only a 
small amount of gravy, which is cooked in a roast pan would be that Tzlik 
Keder.


Harry J. Weiss
hjweiss@netcom.com
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 15:07:26 EST
> From: Yzkd@aol.com
> Subject: Re: matza shiurim
> 
> In a message dated 3/29/00 1:40:51 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
> jjbaker@panix.com writes:
> 
> > We generally do pot roast one night
> 
> For further details see S"A Horav O"C 476:4
> 
> Kol Tuv
> 
> Yitzchok Zirkind
> 

David ellenson wrote a biography on R. Esriel Hildesheimer called "Rabbi
Esriel Hildsheimer and the Creation of a Modern Jewish Orthodoxy"
It was published by University of Alabama Press in 1990
dov weiss 

On 30 Mar 00, at 18:47, Edward Weidberg wrote:

> One can't rely on the matzoh eaten during koreich and the rest of the
> meal (eaten together with other food) to complete the shiur kzayis, 
> because the taste of maror (during koreich) and other food is mevatel
> the taste of matzoh. See MB O"C 475:16 based on Pesachim 115a. (Perhaps
> even bedi'eved.)

Why? We pasken bola matzo yatza. AIUI that means that the 
taste of the matza is not me'akev.

-- Carl


Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for our son,
Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.  
Thank you very much.

Carl and Adina Sherer
mailto:sherer@actcom.co.il

In a message dated 3/30/00 10:21:35 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
hjweiss@netcom.com writes:

> I think the pot roast that many of us are familar with in not the Tzli 
>  Keder in the Shulchan Aruv Harav.
>  
>  The Pot roast I am familiar with is cooked with a considerable amount of 
>  liquid and the resulting volume of gravy would make it impossible to be 
>  considered  broiled.

My point was just to bring attention to the Halacha.

Kol Tuv

Yitzchok Zirkind

(Snip from David Glassner's post)
<Second, why did G-d tell Yonah to go to Ninveh and warn them to
<do teshuvah, and why did Yonah disobey?  He disobeyed because
<he did not want G-d to draw an invidious comparison between
<Ninveh and the Jews if the people of Ninveh were to do teshuvah
<while the Jews did not.  But G-d insisted that Yonah go to Ninveh to
<save it anyway.  Nor was G-d too pleased with Yonah's reaction when
<He finally did spare the city.  I suggest that there may actually be a
<lesson in that little tale.

Yes.  The Ramchal, in Derech Hashem, says that a nevuah may have more
than one possible interpretation, and until events unfold the true
interpretation may be unknown.  Yonah misunderstood.  He believed that
Ninveh would be overturned in a physical sense.  In fact, through
teshuva, Ninveh was overturned spiritually. So even a Navi may
misunderstand what he is told by Hashem (although I would suppose that
Moshe was an exception to this).

Daniel Schiffman

Yzkd@aol.com wrote:


> > I think the pot roast that many of us are familar with in not the Tzli
> >  Keder in the Shulchan Aruv Harav.
...
> 
> My point was just to bring attention to the Halacha.


What does the SA"H say?


---sam

Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 14:48:16 +0200
From: "Shoshana L. Boublil" <toramada@zahav.net.il>
Subject: Re: matza shiurim
 
<<One year, (we had more guests then F'teira available) I took the 2
KeZayit of matza boards, wet them well (we allow Shru'ya) and  kvetched
them.  They came out to just a few bites that were easy to eat.   I have
no solution for anyone who doesn't allow Shru'ya.>>

	The article in the most recent issue of Kashrus magazine,  quoting Rav
Asher Zimmerman z"l,  suggests this (shruya,  not fteira <g>)

Gershon
gershon.dubin@juno.com

Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 14:11:53 -0600
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
Subject: Re: Shiurim
 
<<I would have thought (speaking theoretically now) that it would be okay
to count the matzah and marror of koreich toward the shiurim for
motzi-matzah and marror -- iff you finish koreich within kidei achilas
piras of starting matzah.>>

	I'm sure I'm not the first or only on tbis,  but MB 475 s"k 15 explains
that the ta'am maror derabanan is mevatel ta'am matzoh de'oraisah,  so
that ta'am botel would not be mitztaref to the shiur kezais.

Gershon
gershon.dubin@juno.com

On Thu, Mar 30, 2000 at 07:42:57PM -0500, Gershon Dubin wrote:
: Can someone point me to a good explanation from a hashkafa/philosophic
: perspective as to why nevuah and then ruach hakodesh were taken from us?

First, few Chassidim and Sepharadim as well believe that ruach hakodesh (RhK)
was taken from us. Many of the rest of us as well believe in RhK bizman
hazeh -- at least if we could find the right recipient.

R' Aryeh Kaplan tied the loss of nevu'ah to imprisoning the yeitzer hara (YhR)
for avodah zarah (AZ).

1- Both were in the days of Anshei Kinesses haGdolah.
2- By losing both, the balance between tov and ra, and therefore bechirah
   chafshi, is preserved.
3- It took fighting the challenge of the yeitzer hara in order to develop
   the kisharon for nevu'ah.
4- They are both the same inyan -- one used litov, and the other lira. Which
   is why the YhR for AZ emerged from the Kodesh haKdashim. According to R'
   Aryeh Kaplan this "inyan" involves meditation, but I can accept his argument
   without that nekudah.

Last, R' Moshe writes in D'rash Mosheh that in reality we do hear the daily
bas kol mentioned in the gemara (I forget which one R' Moshe said this about).
The problem is that we are too out of touch with ruchinius to be aware of
hearing it. However, it still makes a roshem, which is why the kol still goes
out.

I think he would therefore answer your question by saying that it's a sad
biproduct of niskatnu hadoros.

Just wondering, why did you ask about nevu'ah and RhK and not nissim? It would
seem intuitive to me that all three have the same answer, which Abayei gave
to R' Papa WRT nissim -- "they had more mesiras nefesh".

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 29-Mar-00: Revi'i, Shmini
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Rosh-Hashanah 16b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         Melachim-II 23

On 31 Mar 00, at 6:26, Micha Berger wrote:

> Last, R' Moshe writes in D'rash Mosheh that in reality we do hear the daily
> bas kol mentioned in the gemara (I forget which one R' Moshe said this about).

Without looking at the Drash Moshe, I assume he is referring to 
Avos 6:2.

> Just wondering, why did you ask about nevu'ah and RhK and not nissim? 

I think we all see nissim today when we look for them. They're just 
not as galuy as in the past....

-- Carl


Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for our son,
Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.  
Thank you very much.

Carl and Adina Sherer
mailto:sherer@actcom.co.il

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 2:00 PM
Subject: RE: Matzas Mitzva & Simcha


> >>>I do not know that the parameters of Aseh docheh LT are relevant, as
you
> yourself note. One needs, of course, to klerr a similar chakira WRT yibum
> and bi'ah sheni'a.<<<
>
> The parallel between the two Tos. is exactly why I learned my way and not
a
> din in dechiya - R' Shternbruch is the first place I saw the other
approach.
> I think the Netziv or R' Shternbruch writes by haggadah we say kol
ha-marbeh
> harei zeh meshubach: as opposed to the miztvas achila where if you go
beyond
> the shiur there is no kiyum, by the mitzvas sippur each word you add is an
> additional mitzva.  Biyas yibum is different because each biya is a
seperate
> act; by matzah there is one act of achila n'hemshech, so the question is
do
> we define the mitzva by the ma'aseh achila or by the kzayis.
>

Um, any Rishonim out there?

If not, I think we are entitled to our own sevoros.

> I have to look back to see why we should say you need achilas basar dumya
> d'korbanos by simcha.  The Ch. haGri"z writes that there are two dinim of
> simcha: achilas korbanos, and other types of simcha such as clothing, etc.
> Similar idea said by R' Moshe Soloveitchik  that while the chovas hayom of
> Shabbos is rooted in oneg and not simcha, there is a din of simcha in the
> achilas korbanos of Shabbos, which is why we say 'yismichu'.  Based on
that,
> b'zman hazeh we cannot be mekayem achilas korbanos and are left with this
> secondary kiyum which seems more subjective.  I have a hunch that the
> achronim insistant on basar reject the split and view it as one big din -
> achilas korbanos is the one and only paradigm to define simcha.  What to
do
> with the chiyuv of woman???  Need to work on it.
>

I have hunch this is a Brisker/Telzer thing: A Brisker cannot take simcha as
an emotion, that's not quantifiable, so it must be defined by its kiyumim. A
Telzer would take simcha as a state of mind, the kiyumim are only the hechei
timztei's.

> >>>It is not clear to me if chatzi shiur asra Torah is reflected in a
> similar principle of chatzi shiur mitzvah. <<<
>
> What do you mean?
>

That you might be an avaryan for a chatzi shiur of an aveira, but not a
mitzvah boy for a chatzi shiur of a mitzva.

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila    ygb@aishdas.org

---- Original Message -----

> Also, Beitza 10b refers to a chashash of not shechting birds on Y.Y as
'asi
> l'imnuyei m'simchas Y"T'.
>

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila    ygb@aishdas.org

:> Also, Beitza 10b refers to a chashash of not shechting birds on Y.Y as 'asi
:> l'imnuyei m'simchas Y"T'.

I'm confused.

I am pretty sure the reason why we (Ashkenazim) hold that fowl is included in
basar for the dinim of simchah because one could be makriv fowl. So I'm
assuming there is a source that is choeik with the gemara RYGB quotes some
anonymous person as citing. No confusion yet...

Except, what would the gemara do with the laws of korbanos?

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 31-Mar-00: Shishi, Shmini
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Rosh-Hashanah 17b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         Haftorah

But not as a shlamim.
A yisrael could never eat a korban oaf.

Micha Berger wrote:

> I am pretty sure the reason why we (Ashkenazim) hold that fowl is included in
> basar for the dinim of simchah because one could be makriv fowl.

I wrote:

<<<
However, we are required to desecrate the Sabbath to save a gentile's life not
mishum eivah, but because of darkei shalom.  If we are required to desecrate the
Sabbath to save a Jewish life, then we are required to desecrate the Sabbath to 
save a gentile life, even though the specific limud that allows us to desecrate 
the Sabbath applies only to Jews, because the principle of darkei shalom tells 
us that it cannot be that we 
would desecrate the Sabbath to save a Jewish life, but would not desecrate the 
Sabbath to save a gentile life.  v'dok.
>>>

Gil Student replied:

<<<
See the Mishnah and Gemara in Avodah Zarah 26a which contradicts everything you 
wrote in the above paragraph.  See also Rambam Shabbos 2:12, Chiddushei R' Akiva
Eiger Y"D 154:2, Pri Megadim O"C  E"E 330:4 that there is a difference between a
nochri who is mekabel sheva mitzvos bnei noach and one who isn't.
>>>

Thank you for the references.  Before replying, I wish to apologize for making an 
argument that was based on my own intuition, recollection and hearsay, and then
suggesting by the "v'dok" at the end that it was in any way authoritative rather 
than just my own speculation, which I was probably too quick to share with the 
list in the first place.  I admit that I have not researched this topic carefully and my 
comments should certainly not be interpreted (unless otherwise indicated) in this 
case or others as representing any one else's opinion (including avosai ha-k'doshim).

On your specific point, I would just note in my own defense that Rav Kahati
in his introduction to masekhet Avodah Zarah quotes the Meiri's commentary
on the Mishnah which distinguishes between hard core ovdei avodah zarah
and more enlightened gentiles who are not hashudim on sh'fikhut dam, 
arayot, or avodah zarah.  I recall that you have expressed skepticism about
this position of the Meiri, but I have no qualms about relying on it.

I wrote:

<<<
Second, why did G-d tell Yonah to go to Ninveh and warn them to do teshuvah, 
and why did Yonah disobey?  He disobeyed because he did not want G-d to draw an 
invidious comparison between Ninveh and the Jews if the people of Ninveh were to
do teshuvah while the Jews did not.  But G-d insisted that Yonah go to Ninveh to
save it anyway.  Nor was G-d too pleased with Yonah's reaction when He finally 
did spare the city.  I suggest that there may actually be a lesson in that 
little tale.
>>>

Gil replied:

<<<
Absolutely.  But that does not lead directly to universalism.
>>>

I am not sure what you would subsume under the heading of "universalism."  If
you mean by "universalism" that I do not accept any distinction between my
aheinu kol beit yisrael and umot ha-olam, then I am happy to inform you that I
do not hold such a view.  

On the other hand, if you mean by universalism that I believe that every human
being is created in the image of G-d (aka tzelem elokim) and therefore has innate
dignity and is loved by G-d, which means that I must also in my own limited way 
strive to love and care for him too, treat him with respect, unless by his own 
actions he forfeits the right to be accorded such respect and dignity, then I
do believe in universalism.  And I refuse to accept that such a belief is in any
way unkosher.

Gil continued:

<<<
Aniyei ircha KODMIN.  You don't ignore, you PRIORITIZE your own family, 
community, and nation.  Let's not forget that the mitzvah of lehachayoso applies
to gentiles as well as Jews.
>>>

If you don't mind, I am going to put on my economist's hat now.  You are suggesting
that there is an absolute lexical ordering of priorities.  In other words, until we
absolutely discharge a higher priority to the nth degree, we may not devote any
resources or effort to a lower level priority.  I agree that in our every day lives 
we ought to be more concerned with what happens in our own families and our
communities than with what happens to humanity at large.  But that can't be the whole
story.  First, I don't believe that anyone really acts that way in real life.  Second, 
I don't believe that that way of acting ought be an ideal that we strive to emulate.  In the 
real world, we have to make trade-offs at the margin.  We cannot achieve perfection
in all things.  An overall optimum over several variables (subject to resource, time
and other constraints) may involve suboptimal results (relative to what would
have been possible) in each variable taken in isolation.  In other words, to put it in 
very crass terms, how many gentile lives would you be willing to sacrifice to put a 
chicken on the table of one more poor Jewish family for one more Shabbos?  I am not 
suggesting that I know what the right answer is to that question, or even that there 
is a right answer, but I would still hope that the number is less than 4 billion.

David Glasner
dglasner@ftc.gov

*********************


[ Distributed to the Avodah mailing list, digested version.                   ]
[ To post: mail to avodah@aishdas.org                                         ]
[ For back issues: mail "get avodah-digest vXX.nYYY" to majordomo@aishdas.org ]
[ or, the archive can be found at http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/              ]
[ For general requests: mail the word "help" to majordomo@aishdas.org         ]