Avodah Mailing List

Volume 09 : Number 068

Thursday, August 1 2002

• Re: The MB and psaq
• Re: Sanhedrin
• Re: Machlokes resolution and Sanhedrin
• Re: wedding rings
• Re: wedding rings
• Tying the Sefer Torah
• Kashrus and Parents
• Re: Kashrus and Parents

> There are different level of poskim
> A stam rav is expected to be able to rely on the Shulchan Aruch and the
> nos'ei keilim including MB
> A higher level poseik is expect to research further.>

This analysis seems supported by Reb Moshe (Igros Moshe YD 38 page 251)
that psak depends on understanding but that a posek can utilize the
bottom line from a sefer without having worked through the material
"Even though I know that there are those who do not study the tshuva at
all and rely entirely on my conclusion. But the posek has the ability
to study it. When he doesn't have time it proper to rely for the time
being when he is busy and then study it later. If when he studies it
he disagrees he can retract his psak and then it is considered as a
mistaken psak. The posek can rely on the fact that the majority of what
I write is definitely correct in emergency and to study it later. Since
he has the ability to study the tshuva it is permitted to rely in the
mean time on the psak in the sefer. It is not considered, however,
that he is actually accepting my psak since he has the sefer...

> FWIW: I have no problem wiht relying upon the MB. It is the OVER-Relying upon
> the MB that has become the problem.
> The MB has evolved into a kind of SA of its own.  IMHO it is one of the
> formeost nos'ei keilim but it has been taken too far.
> Certainly the AhS, RMF, CI  and others must be given weight, too

page 252

"Nevertheless it is not relevant to write absolute psak in a sefer as we
find in a kitzur which does not provide reasons and sources. Therefore
even though the main reason for writing this letter is because I don't
want published a sefer of my halachic conclusions from the Igros Moshe,
I mentioned also that there is no one today who is able to state and
print new psakim which are not mentioned explicitly by the Shulchan
Aruch without providing explanations and sources."

Igros Moshe OC V 13.9 page 26 he refers to the Chofetz Chaim as "Maran
Doros Basrai B'Hora'os Orech Chaim".

                            Daniel Eidensohn

While on certain
> strictly religious matters the Sanhedrin operated independently, it's
> dangerous to assume that on other matters the Sandhedrin didn't keep an
> eye out for its Roman protectors.
....
> To think of the Sanhedrin as a purely
> deliberative body is to impress upon it a modern political template that
> is anachronistic at best and perhaps a bit naive at worst.

Source?

Daniel Eidensohn

> In a message dated 7/25/02 5:29:08pm Eastern Daylight Time, writes:
>> . He notes, however, that
>> Beis Shammai and Beis Hillel represent a problem to this proposal since
>> in fact Sanhedrin still had the ability to execute at that time. He cites
>> the Meiri (Sanhedrin 88b) that Zakein Mamre only applies to a single
>> individual disputing the rulings of the 71 judges of Sanhedrin....

> IIRC Sanhedrin did not execute during the last 40 pre-Churban Years -
> co-inciding with the Beis Shammai - Beis Hillel period.

Hillel was Nasi 100 years before the Churban and served for 40 years. Thus
there was a 60 year period prior to the Churban where capital punishment
and Hille/Beis Hillel and Shammai/Beis Shammai coexisted.

                    Daniel Eidensohn

On 26 Jul 2002 at 17:01, Akiva Atwood wrote:
>>> debate aside, what is the hakpada in some circles for a man not to wear
>>> a ring after marriage? ...

>> I would think it's Begged Isha.

> Why? in secular/non-Jewish circles many (most?) men wear rings. Wouldn't
> that take it out of the geder of Begged Isha?

If you're going to take that position, then pants aren't Begged Ish, 
and women might be allowed to wear them (and yes, I know that there 
are people who make that argument). 

Do we determine whether something is Begged Ish or Begged Isha based 
on the standards of the surrounding society? 

-- 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.

On 27 Jul 2002 at 23:38, Akiva Atwood wrote:
>> Do we determine whether something is Begged Ish or Begged Isha based
>> on the standards of the surrounding society?

> During shmita, at least, what is considered acceptable use of a produce DOES
> depend on the norms of the surrounding society (for example, eating orange
> peels)

But I think in EY the presumption is that surrounding society is solely
Jewish. I was asking whether we determine standards of Begged Ish/Isha
based on standards of non-Jewish society. So I'm not sure how relevant
the Shmitta comparison is. Especially since our standards of dress are
different than those of non-Jewish society (which is less likely to be
the case with orange peels).

-- Carl

In a recent Areivim thread (about upsheren, dated Sun, 28 Jul 2002
02:04:14 +0300) R' Carl Sherer wrote <<< What he does mention is the
minhag of bringing the child to shul with a "mappa" which I believe
refers to the Yekke minhag of bringing the child to shul wrapped in a
cloth for his bris and then using the cloth to close a sefer Torah (for
those of you in Passaic, they have a number of these in the Yeshiva that
they use when there are two days of Yom Tov to avoid the problem of tying
the Sefer Torah - when I was there they all came from one family).>>>

This seems to imply that the problems of tying the Sefer Torah are greater
on a two-day Yom Tov than on a regular Shabbos. I don't understand that.

When the Sefer Torah is put away at mincha on a regular Shabbos, it will
not be used again for almost a week, and that gives added weight toward
considering the gartel to have been tied with a Kesher Shel Kayama,
i.e., a serious problem. It is these cases where a Yekke Wimpel comes
in very handy.

When the Sefer Torah is put away at on Yom Tov, it will be used again
in less than a week, often in *far* less than a week, and that gives
added weight toward considering the gartel to NOT have been tied with
a Kesher Shel Kayama, i.e., a less-serious problem. It is these cases
where a Yekke Wimpel is less important.

Did I misunderstand something?

Akiva Miller

The question arose on Arevim about baalei teshuva who, because of their
circumstances, are forced to (or would prefer to) rely on their parents
and in-laws for kashrus.

Rav Moshe Feinstein discusses a reverse situation in Igros Moshe YD 1:54,
about elderly frum parents who have no choice but to live with their
non-frum children. His conclusion, in the second paragraph there, is that
if there is a great degree of trust based on much experience that the
daughter or daughter-in-law would not deceive that parent, then "he may
rely on her, and eat what she cooks for him from meat, and anything when
she says to him that it is from kosher meat and in the utensils that she
set aside for him, because this does not enter into the category of
'ne'emanus', but of 'personal knowledge', which is like seeing mamash,
since he knows clearly that she does not lie to him."

(This reasoning is significant, and sounds to me very reminiscent of Rav
Moshe's explanation of why he feels we can rely on Chalav Hacompanies. I
think that those who have strong feelings on that question might be
interested in comparing his reasoning in these two different cases.)

Rav Moshe has a second teshuva, in YD 2:43, where he discusses a butcher
who is not personally Shomer Shabbos, but does have a good reputation for
not lying. In this case, he says that even though the teshuva above makes
it a question of trust rather than ne'emanus, even the trustworthiness is
lacking in this case. It would only work in a case "like a husband who
recognizes his wife, for he is with her always, like ... and like ... for
on the basis of many things [harbeh devarim] they always saw and
recognized that their nature is to not lie, and not on the basis of a few
occasions [ayzeh paamim] where there might have been an ulterior motive
[ayzeh taam] for not lying on those occasions."

In a post to Areivim (dated Fri, 26 Jul 2002 17:24:37 -0400), R' Akiva
Atwood pointed out that <<< it's not a question of lying -- it's a
question of knowledge. Unless you have that knowledge, you don't always
know *when* there's a problem, let alone what to do about it. Mistakes
happen often enough in kosher-observant homes -- where people are being
careful. How many more must happen in homes where people are keeping
kosher JUST for the sake of the kids -- without the knowledge of halacha
and the motiveation of yiras shamayim? >>>

I think his logic is impeccable. Except that Rav Moshe doesn't seem
bothered by it.

My guess is that Rav Moshe would say that not only does the non-frum
person need to be trustworthy as judged by the frum person, so too must
the frum person be satisfied by the level of knowledge that the non-frum
person has.

To take an extreme example, if the non-frum person doesn't know the
difference between a kosher butcher and a treif butcher, then
trustworthiness is clearly insufficient. The frum person has to have
confidence that the non-frum person knows the differences between kosher
and non-kosher -- and between reliable hechsher and unreliable hechsher
-- all according to however much knowledge as the frum person demands. If
the frum person is satisfied, then Rav Moshe would say he can rely on
him.

It is true, as R' Atwood points out, that even in the best of
circumstances, problems can arise which the frum person would notice if
he was in the kitchen, but the non-frum person does not notice. Why did
R' Moshe not mention it? My guess is that it is a combination of several
factors: First, maybe we *don't* need to worry that such things would
even happen. Second, even if it happens, there's a chance that the
non-frum person *would* bring it to the frum person's attention. And
finally, even if it's not caught at all, we have so many d'rabanans and
such that it's probably not worth worrying about. (After all, think of
how many problems occur even in the frummest of homes that simply don't
get noticed. No one is perfect.)

Akiva Miller

On 27 Jul 2002 at 23:58, kennethgmiller@juno.com wrote:
> Rav Moshe Feinstein discusses a reverse situation in Igros Moshe YD 1:54,
> about elderly frum parents who have no choice but to live with their
> non-frum children. His conclusion, in the second paragraph there, is that
> if there is a great degree of trust based on much experience that the
> daughter or daughter-in-law would not deceive that parent, then "he may
> rely on her, and eat what she cooks for him from meat, and anything when
> she says to him that it is from kosher meat and in the utensils that she
> set aside for him, because this does not enter into the category of
> 'ne'emanus', but of 'personal knowledge', which is like seeing mamash,
> since he knows clearly that she does not lie to him."

[snip]

> In a post to Areivim (dated Fri, 26 Jul 2002 17:24:37 -0400), R' Akiva
> Atwood pointed out that <<< it's not a question of lying -- it's a
> question of knowledge. Unless you have that knowledge, you don't always
> know *when* there's a problem, let alone what to do about it. Mistakes
> happen often enough in kosher-observant homes -- where people are being
> careful. How many more must happen in homes where people are keeping
> kosher JUST for the sake of the kids -- without the knowledge of halacha
> and the motiveation of yiras shamayim? >>>
> 
> I think his logic is impeccable. Except that Rav Moshe doesn't seem
> bothered by it.

But you're extrapolating from a tshuva that Rav Moshe wrote about 
parents relying on their children to a tshuva about children relying 
on their parents. Are the two situations necessarily comparable? 

-- 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.

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


[ 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         ]