Avodah Mailing List

Volume 05 : Number 120

Wednesday, September 13 2000

• Re: Rav Ovadia Yosef & gilgul
• Re: Rav Ovadia Yosef & gilgul
• Playgroup Halacha
• [none]
• RE: Shmitta
• RE: Shmitta
• RE: Shmitta
• Rav Ovadia Yosef & gilgul
• Mashiach in Tosafot
• Vidui Maaser (2)
• Question from a Yid

RM Berger wrote:
> If you assume that gilgulim can't cross sheivet lines, how can you claim that 
> 8 of the harugei malchus were from lost shevatim?

RG Student wrote:
>  During the reign of Yoshiyahu, Yirmiyahu returned some or most of the lost 
>  tribes.  Arachin 12b, 33a; Rashi, Melachim II 23:22.

As to the Etzem Inyan (who represents who and why) see Seder Hadoros 3880,
as an aside WRT Rabi E. Ben Shamua he writes he may have been from Shevet
Shimon, perhaps he means from the mothers side as REBS was a Kohein
(as the SH"D brings), this means that among the Asara Harugei Malchus
there were at least 2 Kohanin (according to some there were at least 3).

Derech Agav while in the Mesores Hashas in Eirchin 33a there is no
refrence this Gemara is also in Megila 14b, and see Margoliyas Hayam on
Sanhedrin 110b that not all members of the 10 tribes were exiled.

Kol Tuv, KVCT,
Yitzchok Zirkind

In a message dated 9/11/00 5:16:20 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
micha@aishdas.org writes:
> Another question: There are those who hold that Eliyahu was a kohein
> because he was a gilgul of Pinchas was a kohein. (This is certainly not
> the only possible p'shat of "Pinchas zeh Eliyahu" and runs counter to
> pashut p'shat of Eliyahu haGil'adi, as well as a medrash that associates
> Gad's berachah in Zos haBerachah with Eliyahu haNavi.)

According to (Rashi) B"M 114b and Tos. B"B 121b they are Droshos Chalukos, 
and not thru Gilgul,  OTOH there are sources that it was thru Gilgul.

Kol Tuv, KVCT,
Yitzchok Zirkind

At 09:00 PM 9/11/00 -0400, Aaron Rubinson wrote:
>I don't know the metzius of the town in question. However, in Lakewood, where
>this Dayan was speaking there is no such thing as Kindergarten, but rather
>the kids that age go to private "playgroups." As Lakewood (bli ayin hara,
>kein yirbu) has hundreds and thousands of young children, these playgroups
>fill up very fast. Registration is long filled by Chanukah for the following
>year for the most wanted playgroups. Each "Morah" of the playgroup has a
>specific number of children she accepts and when she fills her amount
>registration is closed. Therefore, if one backs out at a much later date it
>would be very difficult to fill that slot, causing the Morah a loss of one
>full slot -- over a thousand dollars. It was this situation the Dayan was
>speaking of. At one time parents were putting there names on multiple lists
>and if there was an opening in a preferred one they would take their name of
>other lists. It was this practice he wanted to stop. Whether this is
>applicable in other situations is Tzaruch Iyun. One thing It might depend on
>is whether it is difficult to fill the slot or impossible. See Tosfos Bava
>Metzia 76B.

I still am doubtful. The playgroup leader has not started her melocho when 
the ba'al ha'bayis put the name on the list - so I do not think this can be 
considered a true chazoro by the ba'al ha'bayis. There would need be a 
kinyan - and not an asmachta either, which might require some legal 
machination - to apply a "knas" to the ba'al ha'ba'yis that has not 
actually received any tangible service or product as of yet from the uman.

Obber dos bin ich maskim: Mentschlich s'iz zicher nisht!

KT,
YGB

I've seen some queries about the ethics of being matir what you yourself
would not use (or ratther eat, in the context of heter mechira). I
suggest seeing the Meshech Chochma to Parshat Tzav, dibbur hamatchil
V'hine. Especially note the Meshech chochma's use of the word "tzarich"
in quoting the Rama in Yore Deah.

Thank-you,
Stuart Fischman

On 11 Sep 00, at 10:33, Sheldon Krause wrote:
> 1. If you hold the heter is laitzei laitzonus then there is no lo saichanem
> problem, because there is no sale. On the other hand the produce is pairos
> shviis. 

That's correct. However:

1. If forbidden work was done in the orchards, it's a machlokes whether
the fruit becomes assur altogether (see Ramban in Yevamos 122a brought in
the Rashba and Ritva there; Aruch erech "Azek," Raavad on the Rif in Succa
40a regarding the goy who announced that his peiros were from Azeika;
Chazon Ish 9:17 s"v Tvua u'Peiros all of whom asser even if the trees
were planted before Shmitta and are not sfichim - see below. Compare
with Rambam in Tshuvos Pe'er haDor 15, Hil. Shmitta v'Yovel 4:15, and
Tosfos HaRosh explaining the Mishna in Shviis 4:2, who are meikil).

All of the foregoing are brought in Mishpetei Eretz on Hilchos Shviis
19:13 at notes 24 and 25.

2. It's assur to buy fruit from someone who is not Shomer Shviis except
on credit ("b'hakkafa"), because the money is nitfas with Kdushas Shviis
(Mishpetei Eretz 19:15 and sources cited there at note 28), and this
assumes that the issur of schora has not been violated (one violates
the issur schora by buying peiros shviis in order to sell them).

3. It also does not solve the problem of vegetables, which are (usually)
sfichin. Sfichin are any plants which germinated during Shviis, or which
reached one third of their growth during Shviis. The gzeira of sfichin
does not apply to perennials (like fruit trees) nor to plants that
were planted before Shviis and reached one third of their growth before
Shviis. Chazal were gozer an issur on sfichin. See Rambam Hil. Shmitta
v'Yovel 4.

> Rav Efrati has made clear that he's worried about the yiddina who
> buys in Machne Yehuda and thinks what she is buying is kosher. 

Sfichin would certainly be a problem if one assumes that the heter is a
joke. So would fruit because the money you pay for it would be nitfas
b'kdushas shviis, and the change may be nitfas in kdushas shviis. See
Mishpetei Eretz 19:17.

Regarding change received from a supermarket which sells things that are
kadosh b'kdushas shviis and things that are not (Reb. Luntz asked this
question a few months ago), Mishpetei Eretz at note 35 there brings two
different shittos what to do from the Minchas Yitzchak 6:129 (P. 189)
and from Minchas Shlomo 45. Kind of late to start posting those now,
but if the chevra are interested, I will bli neder try to post them.

> If the the
> sale is valid but violated lo saichanem it would seem that it is kosher, but
> that the farmer was oveir lo saichanem.  

No, see above. It's more than that.

> Rav Elyashiv is quoted as asking
> (rhetorically) whether one would give hashgacha on a restaurant that cooks
> chicken in milk to be matzil people from d'oraisos. Is this whole tararam
> about being matzil people from lo saicahnaeim?Is that the only aveira going
> on in the migzar hachaklaut?Doesn't seem like it to me.

No, see above.

> Rav Elyashiv (and
> many others, including many Rabbanim from the dati leumi camp) simply don't
> believe the heter works. Period.

Correct.

-- 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

On 11 Sep 00, at Carl Sherer wrote:
> 1. If forbidden work was done in the orchards, it's a machlokes whether
> the fruit becomes assur altogether.

Well why would one have to assume that prohibited work was done? (Isn't
there a lot of Romanian and Arab labor used?)Is there any kind of chazaka or
rov.  Wouldn't there be a sfek sfaika because of the daas matirim

> It's assur to buy fruit from someone who is not Shomer Shviis
> except on credit ("b'hakkafa"), because the money is nitfas with
> Kdushas Shviis

Does this apply to pairos grown on fields owned by goyim?

> It also does not solve the problem of vegetables, which are
> (usually) sfichin. ...

Were they gozer if the fields were owned by non-Jews. (I thought the
mechira was done early to avoid this problem)

Sfichin would certainly be a problem if one assumes that the heter
is a joke.

Well, again that begs the question. If one held that the mechira was not
a joke (which I assume the Rabbanut of Yerushalayim did or else how did
they utilize it in past years?) but involved an issue of lo saichaneim
which could only be justified in a shaas hadchak, would there be a
problem of sefichim?

> So would fruit because the money you pay for it would be
> nitfas b'kdushas shviis, and the change may be nitfas in kdushas
> shviis. See Mishpetei Eretz 19:17.

Again, I assume that if the heter works its no different than buying
the produce from Yassir and the Gang.

On 11 Sep 00, at 21:39, Sheldon Krause wrote:
>> 1. If forbidden work was done in the orchards, it's a machlokes
>> whether the fruit becomes assur altogether.

> Well why would one have to assume that prohibited work was done? (Isn't
> there a lot of Romanian and Arab labor used?)Is there any kind of chazaka or
> rov.  Wouldn't there be a sfek sfaika because of the daas matirim

There is no such rov AFAIK. Besides the whole premise that permits
reliance on the heter is that these people (the kibbutzim or the
individual farmers) have no other source of parnassa. If they do, then
where is the sh'as ha'dchak to allow the sale - they have another source
of parnassa. The fact that they might earn less money if they don't
work their fields on top of that other parnassa is not justification
for invoking the heter.

>> It's assur to buy fruit from someone who is not Shomer Shviis
>> except on credit ("b'hakkafa"), because the money is nitfas with
>> Kdushas Shviis

> Does this apply to pairos grown on fields owned by goyim?

You asked me to assume the mechira was laitzonus, in which case we are
talking about fields owned by Jews.

>> It also does not solve the problem of vegetables, which are
>> (usually) sfichin. ...

> Were they gozer if the fields were owned by non-Jews. (I thought the mechira
> was done early to avoid this problem)

The gzeira does not apply to sfichin grown by non-Jews on fields owned by
non-Jews. It applies to sfichin grown by Jews on fields owned by non-Jews,
or grown by non-Jews on fields owned by Jews (Rambam Shmitta v'Yovel 4:29,
Chazon Ish 10:6 and 3:25).

> Sfichin would certainly be a problem if one assumes that the heter
> is a joke.

> Well, again that begs the question. 

You asked me to assume the heter was a joke. You argued that according
to the shita that the heter was a joke, the land remained owned by Jews
and therefore the only problem would be that one would be eating peiros
shviis. I'm trying to show you that there are other problems beyond that.

> If one held that the mechira was not a
> joke (which I assume the Rabbanut of Yerushalayim did or else how did they
> utilize it in past years?) but involved an issue of lo saichaneim which
> could only be justified in a shaas hadchak, would there be a problem of
> sefichim?

Rav Kook required that mlachos d'oraysa be done by nochrim to get around
that problem. See Mishpat Kohen 67. Otherwise, I believe there would be
a problem. Does anyone check today that such mlachos are done by nochrim
in places where the heter mechira is applied? I don't know. I don't know
how you could check. (For its Shmitta hashgochos, the Badatz regularly
sends mashgichim up over the fields in helicopters to make sure no one
is working them. I have not heard of anyone else doing that).

>> So would fruit because the money you pay for it would be
>> nitfas b'kdushas shviis, and the change may be nitfas in kdushas
>> shviis. See Mishpetei Eretz 19:17.

> Again, I assume that if the heter works its no different than buying the
> produce from Yassir and the Gang.

You would still have the problem of needing a nochri to do mlachos 
d'oraysa.

-- 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

From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
> Another question: There are those who hold that Eliyahu was a kohein
> because he was a gilgul of Pinchas was a kohein.

	Clearly the Gemara held that way, since a Tanna (Amorah?  I forget)
confronted Eliyahu and asked him what he was doing in the beis hakevaros,
since "Mar lav kohen hu?"

Gershon
gdubin@loebandtroper.com
gershon.dubin@juno.com

In response to the query as to who is the "mashiach" mentioned by
the Tosafot, he is Rabbeinu Peretz. "Mashiach" is an abbreviation for
"Mori Sheyichyeh." For more information you can check Prof. Urbach's
"Ba'alei Hatosafot" vol. 2 p.576.

Thank-you,
Stuart Fischman

From: Micha Berger  Subject: Re: Vidui Maaser (2)

> SBA wrote:
> : Since posting this vort, I have searched other Meforshim for their Pshat
> : why this is considered as 'Vidui'.

> Remember that the shoresh means both "to confess" and "to express gratitude".

> According to R' Hutner's peshat in Birchas haHoda'ah
> (in "Shemoneh Esrei"), confessing is "modeh al" (al chayeinu hamsurim
> biyadecha)

What are we confessing when saying al chayeinu hamsurim biyadecha?

> while thanking is "modeh li-" ...

Could you explain that?

> When I heard this I jumped to the conclusion that vidui ma'aser is hakaras
> hatov. Just as you need to make berachah to fully own the food before eating
> it, one needs to acknowledge the Borei's role in making the produce before
> one can give ma'aser from it.

A few psukim earlier regarding Bikkurim, on 'V'omarto Elov'(3),
Rashi says: She'enchoh Kofui Tova, - which fits in with the above,
but AFAIK the procedure when bringing Bikkurim is not referred to as Vidui.
Further on - posuk 13 - on 'V'omarto Lifnei Hashem Elokecho',
Rashi says: "Hisvadeh Sh'nosatoh Maasrosechoh"
- which possibly could be explained as "expressing gratitude"
- but I don't recall a similar meaning for "hisvadeh" anywhere else.

And to repeat the earlier post, the Tosfos YT gives only the Sforno's
pshat (confession) - when explaining the Mishnah.

Frankly I am surprised that there is not more written on this topic.

SBA

How do I submit a question about an extremely controversial subject that no
one seems to be able to address to my satisfaction... The GER TOSHAV
definition(s)...

Who is a Ger Toshav (resident alien)?

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


[ 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         ]