Avodah Mailing List

Volume 13 : Number 002

Wednesday, April 14 2004

• Sreifas Chometz
• Re: R. Elyashiv on Pesach - chumrot
• Re: R. Elyashiv on Pesach - chumrot
• Re: R. Elyashiv on Pesach - chumrot
• Re: R. Elyashiv on Pesach - chumrot
• Re: Sreifas Chometz
• Aleinu text
• Re: Innovation In Religious Paractice
• Re: torah portion
• Re: torah portion
• Number of words in Alenu
• Re: Number of words in Alenu
• R. Elyashiv
• 2/7
• Re: 2/7
• Re: R. Elyashiv on Pesach - chumrot
• Re: R. Elyashiv on Pesach - chumrot
• Re: Rabbis warn against 'meduyak' seforim
• Re: R. Elyashiv on Pesach - chumrot
• Re: R. Elyashiv on Pesach - chumrot
• Re: R. Elyashiv on Pesach - chumrot
• Re: R. Elyashiv on Pesach - chumrot
• Hassidim wearing tefillin on chol haMoed
• Re: diet soda
• Re: R. Elyashiv on Pesach - chumrot
• Re: Hassidim wearing tefillin on chol haMoed
• Re: torah portion

On Areivim, R' Micha Berger suggested <<< But since the mitzvah is bi'ur,
not sereifah, why not pour kerosene on it? You're yotzei even before it
burns, and even if some remains still edible as toast. >>>

Someone once told me that there's a shita that "ein biur ela b'sreifah",
according to which you're *not* yotzei when you pour the kerosene on it.
Even after it burns you won't be yotzay, since what you burned was no
longer edible chometz.

But even if there are other ways to do biur besides burning, I still
wonder about the kerosene. Biur means to destroy it. I can burn it, or
crumble it and cast it into the wind or ocean, or feed it to animals. But
if I pour kerosene on it to make it nifsal me'achilas kelev, it still
exists. Have I been yotzay on Biur Chometz, or did I merely remove it
from the chiyuv biur?

[email #2]

On second thought, Bitul Chometz is considered a valid form of biur,
isn't it? Of course it is, considering that we say the bracha "al biur
chametz" and have kavana for the bitul.

So if bitul (which doesn't physically affect the chometz at all) is a
legitimate form of biur, that would lend a lot of support to RMB that
pouring kerosene is also a valid form of biur. Anyone else have any
views on this?

Akiva Miller

On 5 Apr 2004 at 12:53, Micha Berger wrote:
> But how do you measure the kezayis? You're not going to crunch up the
> matzah you're about to eat. 

Actually, I was told that there were small scales for use at the seder
being sold in Geula last week (really!).

But AIUI, what you were 'supposed' to do was crush a matza before Pesach
and see how much of it fit into the proper sized instrument (I heard an
Israeli matchbox, although that would not coincide with the CI shiur).

[Email #2. -mi]

On 5 Apr 2004 at 12:00, Carl and Adina Sherer wrote:
> On 31 Mar 2004 at 17:57, Stein, Aryeh wrote:
>> I wonder if that would solve the problem of Ein Kiddush Ela B'Makom
>> Seudah, especially if I drink both reviiyos at the same time (i.e.,
>> without a hefsek between the two.) According to those poskim who
>> allow for an extra reviis of wine to qualify as the "seudah," I
>> don't know if having one big cup would do the job.

> This is what I had in mind as well. But this morning, I received a
> response off list from Rav Teitz that in order for this to work, you
> would have to drink the reviis off the top of your cup, and then pour
> it into a separate cup for the 'seuda' part.

I actually found a better solution before the seder. 

In the new RSZA Hagada, this specific question is asked. RSZA held
that it is impossible that Chazal would have given us two contradictory
mitzvos and therefore Kiddush b'Makom Seuda must be reconcilable with
Kol HaMarbeh l'Sapeir b'Yetzias Mitzrayim Harei Zeh Meshubach. And it is:
because the Haggada is part of the seuda.

Rav Asher Weiss' Haggada brings the Eishel Avraham 474 regarding why a
lengthy recitation of the Haggada is not a hefsek, but I have not seen
that inside yet.

-- 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. 

R' Eli Turkel wrote <<< I just re-read Kol dodi hagadah ... He requires
0.7 ounces for 1 kezayiy (reasonable) but 1.5 ounces for 2 (sorry his
math is not very good). This amounts to over 40 grams or more than twice
R. Elyashiv's most chumra shitah. >>>

I have the "mahadura shniya, shnas 5734, im hagahos" edition. The
math is extremely precise, except that he rounds the figures prior to
printing them, causing them to appear inaccurate. If you go through his
calculations (in various sections, but mostly 2:6 and 14:11) and refrain
from rounding, you'll find that he calculates a small kezayis to be 0.733
ounces, two small kezaysim to be 1.466 ounces, and one large kezayis to
be 1.473 ounces.

But the *really* significant point is that he never gave the shiur
of matza in any unit of mass or weight. The numbers I cited above are
explicitly *fluid* ounces, spelled "peh lamed vav alef yod daled (space)
alef nun tzadi ayin samech". He then converts it into units of area,
specifically a rectangular piece of matza whose sides are a certain
number of "inches" (alef yod nun tzadi ayin samech) long. I suspect
that this volume of matza, when weighed, will be pretty close to Rav
Elyashiv's shiur.

<<< He also mentions that the shiur for maror goes up with each edition
(good thing mine is a few years old). >>>

I don't recall seeing that. Which paragraph was that?

Akiva Miller

On Friday 09 April 2004 02:16, Avodah wrote:
> My wife feels that Israeli eggs are larger than those in the US but this
> is a private observation not based on any statistics.

It depends on the quality. The jumbo eggs are the largest you can usually 
find. Extra large US eggs are what passes for normal in many other places, 
and the A graded eggs (not AAA) IIRC are simply small by most people's 
standards.

What egg is Rav Margulies talking about? (Is he American?)

Arie

On 9 Apr 2004 at 10:10, Arie Folger wrote:
> What egg is Rav Margulies talking about? (Is he American?)

If you mean Rav Margolin (who wrote the pamphlet from (and is writing)
Hidurei Midos), yes, he is an American oleh. I have never met or spoken
to his wife, but IIRC he told me that she is an American olah, but she
made aliya at a very young age.

-- Carl

On 7 Apr 2004 at 23:27, Kenneth G Miller wrote:
> Someone once told me that there's a shita that "ein biur ela
> b'sreifah", according to which you're *not* yotzei when you pour the
> kerosene on it. Even after it burns you won't be yotzay, since what
> you burned was no longer edible chometz.

That would be Rav Yehuda in the Gemara. 

> On second thought, Bitul Chometz is considered a valid form of biur,
> isn't it? Of course it is, considering that we say the bracha "al biur
> chametz" and have kavana for the bitul.

> So if bitul (which doesn't physically affect the chometz at all) is a
> legitimate form of biur, 

We don't rely on bitul alone, because we are afraid of finding a 
gluska yafa (nice piece of cake) during the chag, and hesitating 
about disposing of it. 

 - 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. 

From: Akiva Atwood <akiva@atwood.co.il>
> One question I have:
>> The editors also altered Oleinu Leshabei'ach, "based 
>> on the rules of grammar and speech," replacing the 
>> words "vegoroleinu kechol hamonom" with "velo goraleinu 
>> kechol hamonom." This alteration contradicts Rav Yehuda 
>> Hachossid and the Rokeach, both Rishonim who stated that 
>> Yehoshua Bin Nun formulated this prayer with exactly 152 
>> words. This same "emendation" is recorded in the history 
>> books as one of the changes proposed by Nosson Ho'azosi, 
>> a talmid of Shabsai Tzvi yimach shemo.

> What about the other variations to Aleinu (for example, "She hem
> Mistachavim...")?

Not that this would matter to the editors of Yated, but Aleinu in its
current form is not a composition of Yehoshua, and did not have the same
words in its earliest form. It first appears in the heichalot literature,
attributed to Rabbi Akiva. The 8-word lines alternate between singular
and plural, so the phrase in question is "vegorali kechol hamonam". It
has "sheheim mishtachavim", and "ein od acheir". After "efes zulatecha"
it goes off in an unfamiliar direction, 3 x "H' Hu Haelokim", then "hu
echad ushmo echad H' Elokeinu H' echad/ H' H' kel rachum vechanun erech
apayim verav chesed v'emet" and then "al ken ..."

This appears in Schafer, "Maaseh Merkavah" p. 206, and with some
discussion (where I have it) in Meir Bar-Ilan's "Sitrei Tefillah
veHeichalot" pp. 31-38.

   - jon baker    jjbaker@panix.com     <http://www.panix.com/~jjbaker> -

A few weeks ago, we were discussing this idea ("Innovation In Religious
Paractice"), and several posters pointed to Nadav and Avihu as precedents
who demonstrate against such innovations. I noticed two writers who
point out this is only one side of the coin. The Kohen must be balanced
by the Navi.

R' Shlomo Riskin writes in http://tinyurl.com/yq886 [on Ohr Torah Ston's
web site -mi] -- "... The Priest is first and foremost the guardian of
traditional laws and customs, ... These rituals provide structure, but
rarely allow for spontaneity; they ensure continuity but leave little room
for creativity. ... The Prophet, however, ... is often impatient with the
details of ritual, the means which often loses sight of the ends, for him,
passion takes precedence over protocol, spontaneity over structure..."

R' Aharon Lichtenstein writes in http://tinyurl.com/2lywp [on the
Israel Koschitzky Virtual Beit Midrash web site -mi] -- "... The tension
and balance that exist on a national level between the excitement and
innovative spirit of prophecy, on the one hand, and the constancy of
kehuna, on the other hand, are integral to every individual's religious
struggle. ..."

The same thought has probably been discussed by others as well, but I
don't recall it being mentioned when this thread was actice a few weeks
back.

Akiva Miller

Someone asked off list what the connection is between the kerias haTorah
of Shabbos Chol Hamo'ed is to that day:

Rav Dovid Cohen explains based on a Gemara that the tour of the Beis
Hamikdash that was provided to the olei regalim and that included
seeing the keruvim, with the description of the keruvim as showing
"re'uh chibaschem lifnei Hamakom" was done on Shabbos Chol Hamo'ed.

So, (bekitzur, ayen sham!) this day is appropriate to read the parasha
in which our being "niflinu ani ve'amcha"; i.e. specially the objects
of chiba, is mentioned.

Gershon
gershon.dubin@juno.com

> So, (bekitzur, ayen sham!)

We can't "ayen shem" until you provide a mareh m'komo!

-- Sholom

In an Areivim thread entitled "Rabbis warn against 'meduyak' seforim",
there was a link to an article on the "Dei'ah veDibur" website at
http://www.shemayisrael.com/chareidi/ZAV64asiddur.htm

That article mentioned <<< The editors also altered Oleinu Leshabei'ach,
"based on the rules of grammar and speech," replacing the words
"vegoroleinu kechol hamonom" with "velo goraleinu kechol hamonom." This
alteration contradicts Rav Yehuda Hachossid and the Rokeach, both
Rishonim who stated that Yehoshua Bin Nun formulated this prayer with
exactly 152 words. >>>

The version in my Artscroll siddur is pretty much the same as the Alenu
in every other siddur I've ever seen. It contains 73 words in the first
paragraph (*not* counting "She'hem mishtachavim...") and 77 words in
the second paragraph (*not* counting the final "V'neemar", which is not
contiguous to the rest in the Yamim Noraim Musaf).

(In fact, besides including or dropping those two lines, the only
difference I've noticed among siddurim is whether the second paragraph
starts with "Al" or "V'Al", which doesn't change the word count anyway.)

This means that we have either only 150 words, or far more than 152. I
wonder which version of Aleinu is in the siddur used by the author of
that article.

If they want to follow Rav Yehuda Hachossid and the Rokeach, fine. I'm
quite satisfied to follow the Mishna Brurah 132:7 -- "There are several
texts for Alenu... Don't change any text, because each text has its
own basis."

I had originally submitted this post to Areivim, because I simply wanted
to kvetch about the attitude taken by the article's author. But it got
rejected with a comment that I should submit it to Avodah, so now I
feel that I should tack on a question which would make this post worth
of being on Avodah, so here goes:

Do any of you have a siddur in which Alenu has 152 words? If so, which
is it, and how is it different from the more common text?

Akiva Miller

On 9 Apr 2004 at 18:32, Kenneth G Miller wrote:
> This means that we have either only 150 words, or far more than 152. I
> wonder which version of Aleinu is in the siddur used by the author of
> that article.

I think the point was that the number of words was supposed to match
the gematria of "bin nun," which would be 158. If you add "she'heim
mishtachavim..." (which after all was part of the original!) to your
150, you end up with 159. I don't know how to explain the (apparent)
one-word discrepancy.

-- 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. 

Before Pesach someone questioned about R. Elyashiv's psak that an
Ashkenazi woman who marries a Sefardi has to continue to keep the
minhag of kitnios. I think that I may be albe to explain this, perhaps
correctly. Many years ago I heard a shiur on tape from R. M. Gordon
where he claimed that hte din of accepting the minhag of the community
does not apply in America.

He pointed out that the classic sources speak of someone moving into a
city with defined minhagim and that his is also the case of a woman who
would usually move ot her husbands's town. In America, there is no set
minhag and, therefore, this dinim would not apply. Similarly, he pointed
out that hwen a woman remians in her own town or ithey settle in another
town, this din would not apply and she would continue to keep the same
minhagim. See YD 214,2.

M. Levin

I'm trying to research the frequency of 2 out of 7 (eg checking mezuzah,
fixing homes in sharon, telling over names of families with psul).
Any guesses as to why 2/7 rather than every 3? Perhaps the shmitah
cycle made this easier to remember and is less than biannual (although
I couldn't think of any biannual examples)?

Moadim Lsimcha
Joel Rich

On Sat, Apr 10, 2004 at 10:40:27PM -0400, Joelirich@aol.com wrote:
: I'm trying to research the frequency of 2 out of 7 (eg checking mezuzah,
: fixing homes in sharon, telling over names of families with psul).

IIRC, when we learnt the inyan in Morashah "Kollel" (sometime in the
mid-80s), RMWillig explained this to be closer to once every 7 years.
Two checkings within a 7 year span means checking a second time just
under 7 years after the first.

And then, as discussed here, RSZA questions this din WRT our mezuzos,
since our ink quality improved until rolling and unrolling to check the
mezuzah is itself the greatest caused of pesulim!

:-)ODOii!
-mi

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 5th day
micha@aishdas.org        in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Hod sheb'Chesed: What kinds of Chesed take
Fax: (413) 403-9905                       away my independence?

On Friday 09 April 2004 16:43, Carl and Adina Sherer wrote:
> On 9 Apr 2004 at 10:10, Arie Folger wrote:
>> What egg is Rav Margulies talking about? (Is he American?)

> If you mean Rav Margolin (who wrote the pamphlet from (and is
> writing) Hidurei Midos), yes, he is an American oleh. I have never
> met or spoken to his wife, but IIRC he told me that she is an
> American olah, but she made aliya at a very young age.

Yes I mean him. I am wondering of he is referring to American or Israeli
eggs, as I explained in my previous post. The cheaper American eggs are
quite small, which would make the shiur he proposes for kezayit even
smaller. How about asking him? (didn't you say that he teaches in your
son's yeshivah?)

Arie

On 11 Apr 2004 at 10:11, Arie Folger wrote:
> Yes I mean him. I am wondering of he is referring to American or
> Israeli eggs, as I explained in my previous post. The cheaper American
> eggs are quite small, which would make the shiur he proposes for
> kezayit even smaller. How about asking him? (didn't you say that he
> teaches in your son's yeshivah?) 

Used to.... But we are still in touch with him. I can try to ask (I was
thinking anyway of asking his rshus to put the kuntres on the aishdas web
site if the chevra is interested). But here's what he says about egg size
(translation - and mistakes therein - mine):

"Ancient eggs - In Pompeii, Italy, a volcano erupted in 3839 (79
l'minyanam) and covered the the city with ash in an unusual way which
preserved the entire city. The size of the eggs that were preserved there
is similar to that of eggs in our time (based upon the measurements of
Professor Yehuda Felix, "Agriculture in Eretz Yisrael at the Time of
the Mishna and Talmud," Page 160). Earlier eggs have also been found in
the pyramids having similar volume (mentioned in Otzar HaGeonim Maseches
Yom Tov, Page 61 Ayein Sham)."

-- Carl

in a recent post to Areivim...R' Akiva Atwood asked:
   What about the other variations to Aleinu (for example, "She hem
   Mistachavim...")?

Rabbi Teitz pointed out that the original nusach DID have 'shehem
mishtachvim'....and it was taken out by censors

i found a befeirushe 'rayeh' that it probably was still said as far as
the time of the Ramah.....

Shulchan Oruch OC 132:2...the Ramah is talking about the dinim of Aleinu

the loshon of the Ramah is as follows...
ukeshemagiah ehl 'LOI YOISHIAH' yafsik me'aht koidem sheyoimar v'anachnu
koirim....

the words loi yoishiah are found only in the aditional words 'sheham
mishtachavim...'

a guten moed
Simcha G

>I thought k'zayis was a measure of volume.

>In fact R. Elyashiv brings for matzah the shiur of the size of a hand with 
>the fingers not completely open.

It is said that the Steipeler, who had a large hand, ate a kezayit that was 
equal in area to his hand.  I think the reference is to machine matza, but 
I my be wrong.  (The density of machine matza is regarded as higher than 
that of hand matza.)

~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=
IRA L. JACOBSON
mailto:laser@ieee.org

On Mon, 5 Apr 2004, Carl and Adina Sherer wrote:
> Over Shabbos, my son picked up a pamphlet called Hidurei HaMidos
> written by R. Hadar Margolin...                          In the second
> half, he attempts to disprove R. Chaim Naeh's shitta in reviis by
> showing that RCN's shiur was based upon a mistake in the weight of
> the derham, the coin which the Rambam cites in explaining midos.... The
> mistake was that RCN said the derham weighed 3.2 grams. AIUI, today,
> hundreds of derhams have been found, with an average weight of 2.8
> grams and none over 3.04 grams...

R. Chaim Benish has an old sefer
Midot u-Shiurei Torah
that has a summary of all the shitot and discusses the various "drams". He
also concludes that RCN usedtoo large a shiur for the Dram and it changed
from the Rambam's times

Eli Turkel

On 11 Apr 2004 at 13:23, eli turkel wrote:
> R. Chaim Benish has an old sefer
> Midot u-Shiurei Torah
> that has a summary of all the shitot and discusses the various
> "drams". He also concludes that RCN usedtoo large a shiur for
> the Dram and it changed from the Rambam's times

Changed from the Rambam's time to when? 

-- Carl

On Sun, 11 Apr 2004, Carl and Adina Sherer wrote:
> Changed from the Rambam's time to when?

changed from Rambam's time to RCN's time

chag sameach,
Eli Turkel

Over yomtov I was talking to someone and he told me something I found
quite interesting. Namely, that Bobover Chassidim have a minhag that
their 'bochurim' (e.g. young single men) wear tefillin during davening
on chol haMoed (until Hallel at least). When I expressed my surprise at
it, he told me it comes from the minhogim of the Divrei Chaim (R. Chaim
Halberstam, progenitor of the Bobover dynasty) and that the rationale
was that the reason Hassidim don't wear tefillin then (as opposed to
regular minhag Ashkenaz) is based on 'Chassidus'/Kabbalah - and bochurim
'kennen nit Chassidus' (don't know Chassidus). I asked him if Klausenberg
Hassidim have the same minhag, as they also claim Sanzer descent, IIRC,
but he said no.

Anyone know about this, want to confirm it and / or add any comments ?

I find it interesting as it shows that even among Hassidim, there was
not total abandonment of certain Ashkenazic practices, such as wearing
tefillin on chol haMoed.

Mordechai

R' Eli Turkel stated the following:
>I believe that RC diet has the hecjsher of R. Rubin

Perhaps that is because (for the last year or so) it uses a different
sweetener from that used by all the other producers of diet sodas
(in Israel).

~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=
IRA L. JACOBSON
mailto:laser@ieee.org

On 11 Apr 2004 at 13:08, Ira L. Jacobson wrote:
> It is said that the Steipeler, who had a large hand, ate a kezayit that was 
> equal in area to his hand.  I think the reference is to machine matza, but 
> I my be wrong.  (The density of machine matza is regarded as higher than 
> that of hand matza.)

My son came home from his Bnei Brak-run Yeshiva and told us that the 
Steipeler got five k'zaysim from a hand matza. 

[Email #2. -mi]

On 11 Apr 2004 at 17:31, eli turkel wrote:
> changed from Rambam's time to RCN's time

Were there still drams in RCN's time? 

Also, given that everyone is basing themselves on the Rambam, isn't 
it the Rambam's shiur that should be the relevant one? 

-- Carl

The Ezras Torah luach for the first day of chol hamoed pesach notes that
the shatz takes off his tfillin after hallel so as not to be matriach
the tzibbur. Does this apply to all of chol hamoed and is there a
written source?

Moadim Lsimcha,
Joel Rich

On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 01:36:30 -0400 Sholom Simon <sholom@aishdas.org> writes:
> What is this: "tour of the Beis Hamikdash that was provided to the olei
> regalim" ??  A tour?  This is new to me.

The Mishna and Gemara at the end of Chagiga (26 a-b) , which says that
the olei regalim were shown the keruvim (NB Rav Dovid Cohen explained
to me that this means the pictures of keruvim that Shelomo Hamelech put
in various places in the BhM, not those on the Aron, which explains how
they could show them to zarim) and the shulchan, which was raised up for
the purpose (and was therefore mekabel tum'ah, which is what the Mishna
starts off discussing).

That showing of the shulchan, indicating that the lechem hapanim was hot
even a week after its being put onto the shulchan, was done on Shabbos of
the Moed, which is when the lechem hapanim had been on there the longest.
Thus the chiba (re'u chibaschem lifnei Hamakom) was greatest then.

NB The Radvaz says it was done, for Shevuos, on the NEXT Shabbos AFTER
Shevuos, since the entire week was tashlumin.

Gut Moed.

Gershon
gershon.dubin@juno.com

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


[ 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         ]