Avodah Mailing List

Volume 06 : Number 018

Friday, October 20 2000

• Kareis
• RE: Timers and bishul
• A Few Short Ones on Succos
• Re: Dor Revi'i on Shemitah bi-zman hazeh
• Re: Avodah V6 #17-tearing up stamps
• RE: Sukkah Sensitivity
• Kevias Se'udah, Pas Habba b'kisnan, Hypothesis
• Re: Kevias Se'udah, Pas Habba b'kisnan, Hypothesis
• RE: Sukkah Sensitivity
• "Kosher" Cruises?
• Levayasan
• RE: Sukkah Sensitivity
• Simchas Torah
• Re: Using a match on Yom Tov
• Gilgul and Asarah Harugei Malchus
• Re: "standing on the shoulders of giants"
• Re: Using a match on Yom Tov
• Sukkah Sensitivity on Shmini Atzeres

At 10:10 AM 10/19/00 -0400, you wrote:
>What about those who get kareis?

Kareis is not a loss of OhB. It is a severance of the lower regions of the 
neshomo from the higher regions thereof, reducing a person's access to 
kedusha and hashp'o'o and rendering teshuva difficult.

Gehinnom is mechapper for Chayavei Kerisus.

KT,
YGB
ygb@aishdas.org      http://www.aishdas.org/rygb

C1A1Brown@aol.com
> The chiddush R' Shachter develops to assur this assumes:
> 1) Chazarah is not an issur melacha, but a gezeirah
> 2) Gezeiros, as opposed to melachos, can be violated passivley...
Sender: owner-avodah@aishdas.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: avodah@aishdas.org

One Rav gave a lecture on Bishul and while he did not assur timers on crock
pots, he did assur using timers from going on and off.  He said once the
timer is off it must remain off.

Based upon this, I still use a timer on my crock pot to turn the pot off
around Noon, and to turn it OFF only.  This allows the "fire" to go out and
while it is still a kli Rishon, I believe it can then be stirred and served.
Plus I reduce the danger of having a "live" crock pot for the rest of
Shabbos. 

Now would R. Schachter include this use of a timer to go off only?

Moadim Lesimcha
Regards
Rich Wolpoe
Richard_Wolpoe@ibi.com  

These came from a table conversation amongst myself, my shver 
(Rabbi Nate Weiss, formerly of Chicago and now of Yerushalayim), 
and my wife's first cousin, once removed, Avi Raitzik (formerly of 
Chicago, now of Lakewood).

1. Avi was in Bnei Brak yesterday by a grandson of the Steipler. 
That grandson and Rav Chaim Kanievsky both told him that they 
make a leisheiv ba'Succa, any time they enter the Succa to spend 
extended time there. This includes for sleeping, unless they ate in 
the Succa and then went to sleep. Given that we sleep in a 
different Succa than the one in which we eat, I should probably be 
making leisheiv baSucca before I go to sleep at night.

2. Avi has the same minhag that I had regarding Shmini Atzeres in 
Chutz LaAretz, namely to eat in the Succa for the entire meal on 
Shmini Atzeres. Avi asked us what he should do in Eretz Yisrael 
given that no Israelis eat in the Succa on Shmini Atzeres. I told 
him that when I was a bochur, I ate in the Succa by myself. I also 
told him an eitza I heard on a Daf Review Tape from R. Yossi 
Heber, namely for the Israeli to put a towel underneath the schach 
that is over the Israeli's head to make it clear that he is not eating 
in the Succa, and therefore it is not bal tosif. But my shver said 
that the issue arose in Rabbi Druck's shiur this morning (the 4:00 
A.M. shiur at the Kotel), and that Rabbi Druck brought a Sdei 
Chemed that says that in order to avoid making the baalebus feel 
uncomfortable, the chutznik may eat in the house. 

3. While they had the Sdei Chemed open at Rabbi Druck's shiur, 
they looked at another tshuva regarding esrog jelly. If you make 
your esrog into jelly after the chag, do you make She'hecheyanu 
on the jelly? I thought no because the jelly is made together with 
lemons and sugar, and I thought it would make the esrog pieces 
indistinguishable (I've never had esrog jelly), but my shver tells me 
that you can definitely tell them apart. But the Sdei Chemed says 
that you don't make a She'hecheyanu for a different reason. He 
holds that the She'hecheyanu that you make when you take the 
lulav and esrog for the first time is also tofes on eating the esrog.

-- 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

Gmar Chasima Tova (or Gmar Chatima Tova,
depending on your preference).
May you and yours be sealed in
the books of life, health and happiness.

[Apparantly this was sent to me a month ago and I forgot to forward it to
the chevrah. My apologies. -mb]

Yitzchok Zirkind wrote:
> AIUI the D"R was proving that since we have a Shmita in a Shana Muberes, 
> something which is against the prohibition in Sanhedrin 12b, we must conclude 
> that it is not a true Shmita, the question against this position from the 
> Rambam is that since the basis of our calender is based on a Cheshbon of 
> taking in consideration Tkufah and Oviv hence there can be a true Shmita and 
> be a Shana Muberes.

As far as I can tell, you (and my brother-in-law) are indeed correct.
The Rambam's p'sak that a Beit Din could override the prohibition
against intercalating a shemitah year seem to overcome the proof that
the DR tried to bring from the observation that a shemitah year (5724)
was intercalated. I was trying to argue that his s'vara could still be
tenable despite the Rambam, but there would still be no proof from the
observation that a shemitah year was intercalated. Nevertheless it would
be interesting to see whether not intercalating the year 5724 would have
caused Pesach to fall occur too soon. It would also be interesting for
someone to determine how many shemitah years have been intercalated since
the fixed calendar was instituted. If shemitah year are intecalated about
as often as other years, then that might still provide some support to
the DR. If they are intercalated less frequently that might be evidence
in the other direction.

David Glasner
dglasner@ftc.gov

> Nu, and so what prompted the CC to tear up Polish postage stamps when using
> private mail service?

I saw a report on a European gadol who used to make a point of delivering 
letters for people when he went to visit or do business in a town to which 
they were sending mail, in order to save them thepostage money.I think I saw 
this in Zichron Yaakov by R.Yaakov Lifshitz.I don't recall who the rov 
involved was.

"Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer"
>>                                                   How can one apply any
>>choshen mishpat w/o knowing the dina malchusa including how agreements are
>>sealed (e.g. handshakre vs. contract) etc.?

> Good Heavens!
> Do you mean that anyone who knows how to mail letters is a TIDE or TuM'nik?!

Not necesarily.  Any one who is a Gadol is sensitive to their external
environemnt

Secular education is not a prerequisite.

Examples,
#1 I understand that a certain Rosh Yehsiva in Volozhin was allegedly
opposed to secualr education , nevertheless he also allegedly read
newspapres! <smile>

R. Yeruchim Gorelick did not afaik promote secular nevertehless read the NY
Times religously <pun intended of course>

My dear RYGB:
Are you "hung up" on the notion that senstivity to the outside world equates
to or rquires as a prerequistie secular education?  If so - WADR - I think
this is jumping to conclusions. I never said that being sensitive to the
outside world required seuclar education.  It DOES require avoiding being
overly insular.  There is a distincion here.  The sukkah mashal is about
insularity and sensitivty it's not necessarily a statement about secular
education...

Moadim Lesimcha
Regards
Rich Wolpoe
Richard_Wolpoe@ibi.com  

Hypothesis:
Shabbos and Yom Tov can create a kvias se'udah particularly l'inyan Pas
habba b'kisnin. (PhBbK)

Illustration #1:  Erev Pesach shechol beShabbso,  Those who make hamotzi on
Matza Ashira and who also hold that matza ashira is PhBbK, can rely upon the
fact that since their kavvanah is to be yotzei se'udas Shabbos, the kvius
happens w/o any sepcial shiurim that might otherwise be required

Illustration #2:  First evening of Sukkos.  Let's say that after raining for
several hours,  people eat hamotzi indoors.  Then the rain subsides and all
that is left is cake - which is usually PhBbK.  Since there reamins a chiyuv
to wash and make hamotzi in the Sukkah, therefore the shiur ro making
hamotzi on cake is the same as for bread. 

Any sources discuss this?

Moadim Lesimcha
Regards
Rich Wolpoe
Richard_Wolpoe@ibi.com  

On Thu, Oct 19, 2000 at 11:24:47AM -0400, Wolpoe, Richard wrote:
: Hypothesis:
: Shabbos and Yom Tov can create a kvias se'udah particularly l'inyan Pas
: habba b'kisnin. (PhBbK)

: Illustration #1:  Erev Pesach shechol beShabbos...
: Illustration #2:  First evening of Sukkos...

Illustration #3:  Snacking on cake outside of a Succah durring the rest of
Succos. If PhBbK is k'vi'as se'udah, I can't eat cake in my cube at work.
(Even though they were nice enough to get kosher birthday cake so that I
could share. <sigh>)

Lihalachah, see the Aruch haShulchan 639:27 who would not only require
Succah, but even with a berachah. OTOH, the MB 639:13,15-16 and the
Kaf haChaim (ibid 33) require the same kind of eating as for benching on
PhBbK on a yom chol

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 When you come to a place of darkness,
micha@aishdas.org            you do not chase out the darkness with a broom.
http://www.aishdas.org       You light a candle.
(973) 916-0287                  - R' Yekusiel Halbserstam of Klausenberg zt"l

>My dear RYGB:
>Are you "hung up" on the notion that senstivity to the outside world equates
>to or rquires as a prerequistie secular education?  If so - WADR - I think
>this is jumping to conclusions. ...        It DOES require avoiding being
>overly insular.  There is a distincion here.  The sukkah mashal is about
>insularity and sensitivty it's not necessarily a statement about secular
>education...

My dear RRW:

Based on your definition, there is no one who is *not* sensitive to the 
outside world!

KT,
YGB
ygb@aishdas.org      http://www.aishdas.org/rygb

Any justification for the situation forwarded below from a relative in EY?

KT,
YGB
ygb@aishdas.org      http://www.aishdas.org/rygb

>Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 11:34:52 -0500

...

>We are under very heavy stress here, as you might imagine.  Let us all 
>pray, for, as always, that is the path to Salvation.

[I couldn't bring myself to edit the previous paragraph out -- despite
its being off-topic. -mi]

>On a lighter note, I'm not sure it's appropriate for one of your web-based 
>discussion groups, but is it still considered "assur" to board a ship 
>strictly for pleasure less than three days before Shabbat?  The background is:

>- Many kosher cruises are suddenly departing on Thursday or Friday, one 
>  even boarding Friday, leaving on Shabbat.
>- The "hetter" is quoted as coming from "many" unnamed ... 'poskim". 
   ("Try looking it up on Bar Ilan's Responsa system," I was told!)
>- The claimed basis for the "hetter" is that in the old days it took three 
>  days or so to get one's "sea legs", hence the prohibition to start a 
>  journey knowing it was likely Shabbat would be unenjoyable.  Today, of 
>  course, the ships have stabilizers...

Daniel A HaLevi Yolkut <yolkut@ymail.yu.edu> asked, "Can anyone give
mekoros, esp. in Chasidus, for the significance of the Livyasan in
general, and the Sukaso shel Livyasan specifically?"

See Avraham Ben HaRAmbam's "Milchomos Hashem" (pp. 66-67 in R. Margolios'
Mossad HaRav Kook edition).

Through a melange of p'sukim and maamarei Chazal based essentially on an
"if A= B, and B=C, then A=C" sort of logic, Avraham Ben HaRambam asserts
that the Levayasan is the yetzer harah, "eating" it implies destroying
(i.e., "devouring") it, and the general implication is that in Olam Habah
the yetzer will be undone, and we'll thusby be able to unite with the
Ribbono Shel Olam since all impediments to that will have been removed.

This is obviously a very short and blunt-edged treatment of a very subtle
and gorgeous analysis. In fact, R. Margolios zt"l was obviously so taken
by the orginal that he placed the whole passage in italics!

Avraham Ben HaRambam uses much of the same symbols and imagery Rambam
himself uses (i.e., sechel hapoel, kvishas hayeyzer, etc.), so one seems
to be sustified in assuming Rambam himself gave this over to his son.

I imagine, though, that that raises an old question which I'll enunciate
again for sake of inquiry to list-members: Did Avraham Ben HaRambam
speak for his father as a rule?

    -- Yaakov Feldman

Let me clarify what I mean by Sensitivity to the outside world...

It means being concerned with the world around us.  

Illustration, if people are starving, we are concerned.  We might not have
the time to act upon every worthwhile cause, but we have no right to dismiss
those causes as meaningless because they do not affect us directly. 

Therefor we are senstive to our environment.  We care about polution, waste,
"global warming".  Perhaps we are careful about buying gas guzzling
automobiles in order to not support Arab oil sheikhs more than absolutely
necessary.  

It's about awareness and caring for the general society - up to a point!
It's like a form of Compasionate Orthodoxy (apologies to GW Bush).

Of course we need to shield ourselves from assimilation, that's obvious.
The chiddush is that in going overboard to protect ourselves we may become
insensitive to the world around us. Remember the Shvil haZahav?

As far as secualr education goes, that is a real gray area.  I heard from a
reliable source that R. Hutner ZTL gained a secular education privately w/o
attending College.   There are certainly real problems with the life-style
of today's college campus.  Getting secular knowledge in general might be
somewhat debatable, IOW how much? how far? But even those amongsts us who
feel secular studies are bittul zman at best and potentially worse, still
need to feel at least a little bit integrated into society.  Being a hermit
is not ok especially if it means evading social responsiblities.
Cloistering ourselves might be ok while in Yeshiva, it's not an ultimate
good.

I would say that even the GRA who rarely venturedf out of his daled amos of
halacha was at least concerned with the world at large.  And the Baal
HaTanya was not a proponent of secular studies nevertheless was aware of the
spiritual implications of Napoleon's invasion.

Personally, I see secular education as a good WHEN the kavvanah is tikkun
olam or a better understand of Torah or of how HKBH workds, etc.  Still, I
have acknowleged that TuM is not for everybody, but common menchilckeit is. 

Moadim Lesimcha
Regards
Rich Wolpoe
Richard_Wolpoe@ibi.com  

 

I found a shtickel Torah in Rav Zvi Pesach Frank's Mikroei Kodesh,
Succos Volume 3, Siman 46 that I wanted to share with all of you.
I'm sending it to Areivim also to be sure that you all get it before
the Chag, even if Micha doesn't get to release Avodah messages today.

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

The Gemara in Succa 48a lists the six items (Pza"r Ksha"v) which
differentiate Shmini Atzeres/Simchas Torah from Succos. The reish stands
for "regel," that SA/ST is a "regel bifnei atzmo." Rashi there comments
(s"v regel bifnei atzmo) "she'ain yoshvin ba'Succa." The Aruch La'Ner
comments that Rashi could also have brought Lulav or Nisuch HaMayim,
which are also not noheg on Shmini Atzeres, but he chose only one of them.

But Rav Frank brings from Rav Zevin that Rashi didn't stam azoi pick
Succa. Lichora there's a kashya on Rashi - what does not having to sit
in a Succa have to do with the fact that it's Shmini Atzeres. If it was
a yom chol, we also would not sit in a Succa! To be meyashev Rashi, Rav
Zevin brings the Targum Yonason on the pasuk "BaYom HaShmini Atzeres Tihye
Lachem" (Bamidbar 29:35), where the Targum Yonasson says that on the 8th
day you should be "b'chedva" (with simcha) "min matilchon le'bateichon"
(from your Succa to your house). According to the Targum Yonasson,
the etzem of Shmini Atzeres is to go b'simcha from your Succa to your
house. Why is going from your Succa to your house so special?

The Mikroei Kodesh explains this by bringing the Gra in his sefer Yahel
Ohr. The Gra there writes that this is also what it is like in the Beis
HaMikdash. The nochrim were allowed to come to the Har HaBayis, but
the Cheyl and the Azara which were the Bayis itself were places where
only Jews could go. He then mentions the Gemara of the three levels;
that Avraham called the Makom HaMikdash Har, Yitzchak called it Sadeh,
and Yaakov called it Bayis (brought also by the Gra in Aderes Eliyahu
Dvarim 33:19).

In the Harerei Kodesh, Rav Frank's grandson, Rav Yosef Cohen, explains
what the Gra meant. He brings from the Yalkut Shimoni at the end of
Remez 782 (in Parshas Pinchas al asar), the famous Medrash of Rav Pinchas
that the 70 bulls that were sacrificed during the course of Succos were
k'neged the 70 nations, but after the seven days of Succos were done,
HKB"H said to Klal Yisrael, "now you and I will rejoice together, and I
will not be matriach you to bring any more than one bull and one ram." But
the Medrash goes on, that when Bnei Yisrael heard this they started to
praise Hashem, "zeh ha'yom asah Hashem, nagila v'nismicha bo." "Amar Rav
Avin, ain onu yodin ba'meh lismoach, im ba'yom, im b'HKB"H, ba Shlomo
u'peiresh "nagila v'nismicha bach, bach b'torasoch." Klal Yisrael's
simcha on SA/ST is in HKB"H and His Torah, and HKB"H's simcha, as we
shall soon see, is in Klal Yisrael.

In the Tanna d'Vei Eliyahu, it says that HKB"H is sameach b'chelko. In
Sefer Toldos Adam, it's brought that R. Chaim Volozhiner asked the Gra
what this Tana d'Vei Eliyahu means, and the Gra explained that HKB"H is
sameach with Klal Yisrael, as it says in the pasuk "ki chelek Hashem amo."

The Harerei Kodesh explains this al pi the Rambam in Hilchos Shmitta
v'Yovel 13:13, which I brought a couple of weeks ago in a different
context - that any person who separates himself from worldly affairs to
spend his time serving Hashem is considered chelek Hashem.

So we see that Klal Yisrael is chelek Hashem and that our chelek is
Hashem and his Torah. And therefore, brings the Maseh Rav in Hilchos
Succa 233, the Gra was especially happy on SA/ST, and he would dance
before the Sefer Torah, and his face would beam like a lighted torch,
because this is Klal Yisrael and HKB"H and the Torah all acting as one
(Yisrael v'Oraysa v'Kudsha Brich Hu Chad Hu). The Gra would act this
way until the Sefer Torah went back into the Aron Kodesh, and then he
would only be happy like on a regular Yom Tov. Ayen Sham.

The Harerei Kodesh then is meyashev the Yahel Ohr based on the peirush of
his own son, Rav David Cohen, in the Sefer Zman Simchaseinu. The Simcha
of Shmini Atzeres and Simchas Torah is a simcha from the Succa into the
house, a triple simcha of Yisrael and the Torah and HKB"H all as one. The
inyan of the Beis HaMikdash is an inyan of a marriage between HKB"H and
Klal Yisrael, as the Mishna at the end of Taanis explains on the pasuk in
Shir HaShirim, "b'yom simchas libo hu binyan beis ha'bchira she'yeboneh
b'mheira b'yameinu." The Gra in the Yahel Ohr meant that there are two
parts to the binyan Beis HaMikdash. One is the etzem kabolas ol mitzvos
which is not part of the Bayis, and is like ka'veyachol a man taking a
pilegesh. This is like geirim who are mitztaref to Klal Yisrael, who need
a special ribui to be mechuyav in Succa, and is like Yitzchak Avinu's
"sadeh." But Klal Yisrael has the extra level of "bayis," like Yaakov
Avinu who was "mitoso shleima." HKB"H marries Klal Yisrael like a man
marries his wife to be an ezer k'negdo, and he brings Klal Yisrael fully
into His house. [And it is yadua that in many respects the Jewish home is
compared to the Beis HaMikdash, the table to a mizbeach, and the parents'
room to the Kodesh Kodoshim v'ain kan makom l'ha'arich - C.S.].

Klal Yisrael was betrothed to HKB"H with the Torah. The Torah is our
Kiddushin, as the Gra brings in his Chidushei Agodos to Bchoros 8b. And
since this is the case, it makes sense that when HKB"H wants to bring us
into His house to live with Him, that the Kodesh Kodoshim should be the
place where the Torah lives. Ayen also in the Tur who says that Succos
is the Chag of Yaakov Avinu, and it is on Succos that HKB"H choses to
live with Bnei Yisrael in the same house.

This also explains the Chida who writes that geirim were mismaet from the
mitzva of Succa from "ha'Ezrach" or from "b'Yisrael," but were added back
in by a special ribui. The ananei ha'kavod which we remember by sitting
in the Succa were designed to bring Klal Yisrael into HKB"H's house,
and, as the Gra says in the Yahel Ohr, this was shayach only to Klal
Yisrael and not to geirim. The Erev Rav in the midbar walked outside
the ananei ha'kavod, and therefore geirim need a special ribuy to be
mechuyav in Succa.

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

May we do our part to be mashre the Simcha of the Torah on all of us
on this Yom Tov in these troubled times, and to be Sameach with HKB"H
and with the Torah, and bring about the rebuilding of the Bayis and the
reuniting of HKB"H, Torah and Klal Yisrael b'mheira b'yameinu.

A gutten kvittel and a gutten Yom Tov.

-- 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

R' Micha Berger asked:
> Is lighting a piece of wood hav'arah or bishul? Well, if it's a new
> fire it's hav'arah, but if it's an old fire it's bishul. (Which is why
> it's muttar on Yom Tov, IIUC.) However, in this case one can't claim it's
> bishul, because nothing is heated to yad soledes bo until much less than
> toch kidei dibbur after the new fire erupts. Which means that lighting a
> match where it bursts into flame before getting overly close to the
> original flame would be either hav'arah or *nothing* di'Oraisa, and
> therefore only deRabbanan on Shabbos?

I don't have a full answer, but pages 270-271 of R' Eider on Shabbos,
discussing melting metal and other items, can be a good place to start.

On 270, he writes "... heating metal until it becomes glowing, if he
intends softening it is a Toldah of Mevashel. Heating metal until it
becomes glowing, if he does not intend softening it, he is chayav for
mav'ir..." From that, it sounds clear that heating wood or a match until
it glows, is mav'ir, and not bishul.

For the record, though, it might not be so, that <<< one can't claim it's
bishul, because nothing is heated to yad soledes bo >>>. See note 194
there --- IIUC, items which are congealed at room temperature are subject
to bishul if they melt at higher temperatures, even if below yad soledes.

It is late, and I don't have the time -- or brains -- to look into it in
depth right now, and I wanted to get this out quickly. I don't know the
maskana of it all, but for those who are interested in these questions,
those two pages are certainly very relevant. Tze ul'mad!

Gmar Tov
and Good Yom Tov
and, don't forget: Good Shabbos!

Akiva Miller

A few weeks ago there was a discussion about the concept of gilgul neshama
and the asarah harugei malchus. I can't recall if this was mentioned,
but the targum on 'yechi Reuvain v'al yamos' says that Reuvain should
not die a *second* death. The R' Bachye (as well as the P' Yonasan on
Targum Yonasan) explain that the targum is hinting to the concept of
gilgul neshama. The asarah harugei malchus were a reincanation of the
shevatim and their death was mechaper for mechiras Yosef. Moshe's beracha
was that Reuvain, who did not participate in the sale, not suffer this
'second' deat as punishment.

It was mentioned to me in personal email that the history of the
expression was already established on Avodah last iteration of the
topic. See R' Mechy Frankel's post from 25-Elu-58 (bila'az 15-Sep-98 CE)
at <http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol01/v01n049.shtml#14> (also available
by asking "majordomo@aishdas.org" to "get avodah-digest v01.n049").

Bikitzur rav: The first known use of the metaphor was Bernard of Chartres
(a younger contemporary of Rashi) and brought to the Jewish world by
Tosefos Rid.

I refer you back to the original post, as R' Mechy also discusses why the
times called for the term, what the expression has been taken to mean,
etc...

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 When you come to a place of darkness,
micha@aishdas.org            you do not chase out the darkness with a broom.
http://www.aishdas.org       You light a candle.
(973) 916-0287                  - R' Yekusiel Halberstam of Klausenberg zt"l

On Thu, Oct 19, 2000 at 11:42:25PM -0400, R' Akiva Miller wrote:
: I don't have a full answer, but pages 270-271 of R' Eider on Shabbos,
: discussing melting metal and other items, can be a good place to start.

Thanks for the reference, I'm sure RSE will point me to primary sources.

: On 270, he writes "... heating metal until it becomes glowing, if he
: intends softening it is a Toldah of Mevashel. Heating metal until it
: becomes glowing, if he does not intend softening it, he is chayav for
: mav'ir..." From that, it sounds clear that heating wood or a match until
: it glows, is mav'ir, and not bishul.

Actually, it's a machlokes amora'im carried down to the rishonim. It's
news to me that we took sides and said that causing metal to glow is
hav'arah.

In either case, lidinei Yom Tov we know that one may light a candle (or
ch"v a cigarette) from another candle. So your comparison is somehow
flawed -- I just can't tell you why burning wick is different than
glowing metal.

To answer an earlier question bi'oso inyan, on Thu, Oct 19, 2000 at
12:12:47AM -0400, RAM wrote:
: I'm not clear on what aspect of this bothers you. Is bishul more machmir
: than mav'ir?

What bothers me is that if I'm correct then you can't use the active
end of a match for taking the flame from one candle to another on
Yom Tov. Because the antimony [tri]sulfide at the end of the match
will, rov pe'amim, burst into a new flame before it can catch from the
pre-existing one.

Since the Shemiras Shabbos Kehilchaso tells people they may use a match
for this without specifying which end to use, people might be oveir
hav'arah on Yom Tov.

Again, if I defined "new flame" correctly.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 When you come to a place of darkness,
micha@aishdas.org            you do not chase out the darkness with a broom.
http://www.aishdas.org       You light a candle.
(973) 916-0287                  - R' Yekusiel Halberstam of Klausenberg zt"l

On Hoshana Rabbah my father would do some thing that will forever be
burned into my memory. To put it the way he did... Er Hut Zich Gezegent
Mit Di Sukkah. That is, he said goodbye to the Sukkah. The manner in
which he did this was by putting on a Kitel, entering the Sukkah midday,
and then enjoying a full course Yom Tov meal, complete with Chalah, fish,
chicken soup with specially made Kreplach (or Kreplakh for those of you
from the YU school of transliteration) and Chicken. Afterwards he said
"Yehi Ratzon Shenizkeh Leyasahv B'Sukkah Shel Liviathon". This is a
very beatiful Minhag which I unforunately have not kept, mainly due to
my work schedule.

Growing up in Toledo, Ohio, I never knew there was any other way to
proceed. This, my father told me is what he saw by his father, a Rov and
Posek of a community of five towns (Poland, not NY), and was transmitted
to him mimetically over many generations. Years later after learning
what the Shulcahn Aruch has to say about eating in the Sukkah on Shmini
Atzeres because of the Sfeka D'Yoma issue, I asked my father about it
and thought that we should be eating in the Sukkah on Shminni Atzeres
(Sh A). His reaction was, "G-d forbid!" Chas VeSholem that I should ever
eat in a Sukkah for Shminni Atseres. This is a Mesorah for me.


This issue has always bothered me because of the fact that as brought
down in Halacha the practice of not eating in the Sukkah on Sh A is a
Minhag Taus. I have been seeking a legitimate rationale for the practice
ever since.

The obvious first is that it is Nireh K'Bal Tosef. Especially after
being Mekabel Sh A in Shmoneh Esreh and Kiddush. While Bal Tosef is a
legitimate concern on Sh A to the extent that one does not take 4 Minim
then, this is not the case for Sukkah because, since eating outdoors in
a hut is not an unusual thing to do, people will not look at it as Bal
Tosef but as enjoying the weather etc.

But even though the SA Paskins this way, it seems to me that ultimately
Bal Tosef is indeed violated. No one eats in a hut in the usually
inclement weather of late October. Eating in a Sukkah will not be mistaken
by anyone as anything but "eating in a Sukkah". Such an act must therefore
come under the heading of Bal Tosef. Sfeka D'Yoma should not override
Bal Tosef. This is not like other D'Rabbanons that override D'Oraisosvia
via the mechanism of Shev V'Al Taseh. This requires an ACT of Leshev
BaSukkah. Not saying the bracha of Leshev BaSukkah doesn't negate the
act of sitting in the Sukkah. So it perplexes me that the D'Rabbonan
of Sfeka D'Yoma overrides the D'Oraisa of Bal Tosef when it is not a
Shev V'Al Taseh. Using the weak Sevara that "people eat outside anyway"
this time of year doesn't seem to be enough to allow you to be over this
Lav. Especially when this ( the alleged "normalcy" of eating outside)
is in no way true. I know of no one, Jew or Goy, who eats in a hut at
October's end. As a matter of fact this is one of the very reasons that
we eat in a Sukkah in Tishrei instead of on Pesach in Nissan, because
this is the time of year that people normally stop eating outside.

We eat outside now to show that we are not doing it for pleasure but for
the sake of the Mitzvah. So, how can we use the very same circumstance
to say it is normal to do so. Isn't it a kind of Tarti Disasri?

Does anyone know of any other rational for not eating in the Sukkah on
Sh A?

HM 

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


[ 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         ]