Avodah Mailing List

Volume 16 : Number 128

Sunday, February 12 2006

• Re: Avodah V16 #127
• Pets
• Re: Pets
• kashrut organizations
• Basar Shenis'alem Min HaAyin (was: Kashrus)
• RE: Pets
• Re: Killing kinim on shabbat
• Re: Killing kinim on shabbat
• Parshas Hamon Segulah & a Maaseh shehoyo in Melbourne
• Re: Avodah V16 #127
• RE: Avodah V16 #127
• RAS's View on Chazal's Infallibility WRT Science
• Re: R' Gamliel's Navigational Tool

RDRiceman & RSCoffer bring up an issue that has bothered me ever since
I first realized it a couple years ago, and as of yet I haven't found
a satisfactory answer (though I have several attempts); perhaps someone
out there does have a good one.

The halakha stated in the Gemara is simply that in Bavel we start saying
vetein tal umattar 60 days after after the equinox; and it has become
accepted to use Shemuel's calculation to figure out when the equinox is.
But how do we know that we are never supposed to correct this calculation?

Right now it is about two weeks ahead, what about when it puts the equinox
in the dead of winter? (Since it gains a day every 128 years it will
converge with astronomical winter solstice in another 2k years or so).

Incidentally, we can also figure out that this calculation was not used
throughout the time that we were in Bavel because if it had been used
for that long then it would be a lot further off; so either there were
adjustments to the calculation sometime during the early period of our
settlement there or another calculation was used.

[Commenting on an Areivim discussion. -mi]

From: Akiva Atwood <>
> Shmuel Zajac <s.zajac@verizon.net> wrote:
>> I don't know i you are aware of this, but having *pets* 
>> has always been frowned on in certain circles.

> My understanding  is that Chareidi poskim here hold pets 
> are assur UNLESS there is a valid reason 
> (for example, a child who needs it for emotional therapy) --and 
> in those cases it's better to have a kosher pet than a non-kosher pet.

AFAIK it is ossur to have a 'kelev ra' in your house. 
Can anyone supply a source otherwise?

SBA

On Sun, Feb 12, 2006 at 02:49:20AM +1100, SBA wrote:
: AFAIK it is ossur to have a 'kelev ra' in your house. Can anyone supply
: a source otherwise?

I don't know of one. I guess that means that kalavim tovim are mutar!

IIRC, Shemu'el (the amora) threw bread over which not-yet-roasted meat
was cut to his dog ("lekalbeih", note the posessive "-eih"). Chullin 112a.
Could have been a guard dog rather than a pet...

Interesting, Shemu'el is also the one who warns against rabid dogs in
Yuma 83b. (He warns against ru'ach ra'ah, thereby leading RASoloveitchik
to conclude that what they called "ru'ach ra'ah" we would today call
"air carrying infectious disease".)

Gut Voch!
-mi

-- 
Micha Berger             For a mitzvah is a lamp,
micha@aishdas.org        And the Torah, its light.
http://www.aishdas.org                   - based on Mishlei 6:2
Fax: (270) 514-1507

> I am blissfully ignorant of the economics of supervising kashrus.  Are you
> implying that kashrus agencies don't have a pecuniary interest in keeping
> the businesses they supervise happy? How are they funded?

I was once told by R. Senter who runs the chaf keh that when he first
started he ran both the business side and the hechsher side. He was
later pressured into separating the two. So he ran the business side
and hired someone else to be charge of kashrut.

All the major kashrut organizations have a "iron curtain" between the
people that decide kashrut issues and those that sell the "product". So
in the OU rabbis like RHS and R. Belsky make the kashrut decisions while
others get the customers.

 --
Eli Turkel

R' Harry Weiss wrote:
> In our community if our butcher/deli was forced to
> have a mashgiach temidi, he would be forced to shut
> down immediately. ... Yotzei venichnas does meet all
> the requirements by the etzem halacha, especially
> with an observant owner.

I'm unclear on what you mean by "especially with an observant owner". It
sounds like you mean that a yotzei venichnas meets all the requirements
by the etzem halacha, even when the owner and staff are all non-observant.

Is this really the case? My understanding is that a yotzei venichnas is
sufficient for Basar Shenis'alem Min HaAyin only if the yotzei venichnas
recognizes the meat on his return, to insure that there has not been any
non-kosher meat brought in. I don't see how that can work in a butcher
shop where new pieces can be cut and packaged at any time.

If all the cutting and packaging takes place when the mashgiach is
present, and then he secures the packaging materials (labels and such)
so that nothing can be marked as kosher without his okay, then that would
suffice. But without such precautions, isn't a mashgiach temidi required -
by ikar hadin - for meat when no shomer mitzvos is present? Isn't that
what the halacha of Basar Shenis'alem Min HaAyin is all about?

RHM's post was about a butcher, and I'd add that my question apply even
more so for a restaurant or other establishment where the meat is cooked
and served. How can a yotzei venichnas recognize that what he sees when
he returns is the same meat as he saw when he left?

Important disclaimer: I have never learned Basar Shenis'alem Min HaAyin in
the Shulchan Aruch, and the above post is based on what I've "picked up"
over the years. If anyone can correct me, and point me to the appropriate
simanim and seifim, I'd really appreciate it.

Akiva Miller

On February 11, 2006 SBA wrote:
> AFAIK it is ossur to have a 'kelev ra' in your house.
> Can anyone supply a source otherwise?

Not a source, just a conjecture. Probably because it goyish...lo seilchu
b'chukas hagoy or something like that.

Simcha Coffer

On Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 10:19:41AM -0500, S & R Coffer wrote:
: I don't think you are correct. We say vtu'l several days after the sixty day
: marker to the autumnal equinox because it is easier to follow Shmuel's
: calculation in the Gemara of 365 and a quarter days (instead of the true
: 365, 5 hours, 48 minutes 48 seconds as imposed by Gregory the something 7 or
: 8 I think). So at the expense of a small inaccuracy, the chahcmim stuck to
: the less accurate cheshbon of Shmuel. If anything, you can claim that Shmuel
: was fallible for proposing this cheshbon however he was just copying it from
: Julius Ceasar.

I think this is a different thing entirely.

Any system has to be an approximation. Years can't be evenly divided into
months (or into days) -- the proportion is not a rational number. The
365-1/4 day estimate is simple enough to be self-evident. It needn't
have come from the early Roman calendar.

Second, because some approximation or another had to be used, all Shemu'el
is saying is that this estimate is close enough for pesaq. Which makes
sense for things like vtu"l or birkhas hachamah. However, for the
calendar itself, upon which deOraisos depend, we insist on the closer
approximation.

IOW, Shemu'el isn't asserting physical correctness, but setting a
mandatory precision in estimation.

Gut Voch!
-mi

-- 
Micha Berger             You will never "find" time for anything.
micha@aishdas.org        If you want time, you must make it.
http://www.aishdas.org                     - Charles Buxton
Fax: (270) 514-1507      

On Mon, Feb 06, 2006 at 10:57:57PM -0500, S & R Coffer wrote:
: No. And this is a famous sha'ala. Some take the approach that there were
: types of lice in the time of Chazal that reproduced asexually. Others say
: "nishtanu hativi'im", which is not necessarily the same as the previous
: answer (in the sense that today's lice are the same as Chazal's lice but
: their reproductive behaviour was altered). RJO has informed me that,
: based on his investigation, there is a perfect reconciliation for this
: gemara but thus far he has not had the time to take me through his
: mehalech and therefore I wish to propose the following (based on R'
: Aryeh Carmel's communication with Rav Dessler).

As already posted in the past, I recall a shiur from R' Dovid Lifshitz
where he explains that maggot eggs have no halachic mamashus, since
they are too small to be seen without a lens. In reality, the maggot has
a zeh vezeh goreim -- the egg, and the food it ate since hatching that
allowed it to grow to visible size and issur. Since the egg doesn't count,
only one goreim is considered. Which is why it's "made from the meat"
as far as hilkhos Shabbos and kashrus are concerned.

: Anytime Chazal propose something in science, if they base a halacha on
: their scientific conclusion, the halacha cannot be discarded despite
: the fact that the science turns out to be faulty. We must now search
: for current scientific explanations which support their halachic
: conclusions. The idea behind this is that Chazal did not always mean
: to condone the scientific principles which they forwarded. Rather,
: they advanced explanations for the halachah which seemed to fit the
: paradigms of their day. However, the halacha itself was a kabala and
: thus can never be discarded...

R' Kook says this only lechumrah. That the din could have other
motivations other than the one given. However, not lekulah. He believed
that it was possible that the din really was a pesaq based on bad science,
and therefore should not be applied. Since every din has a myriad of
reasons, eliminating one reason lechumrah doesn't eliminate the chumrah;
but eliminating one reason lequlah is sufficient to create a chumrah.

: The upshot is that Chazal's infallibility in Torah, to which I personally
: subscribe, is not compromised from ostensibly faulty scientific
: statements.

It wouldn't anyway. Chazal spoke of the din of a mouse that came from
the dirt that people believed existed. The existence of such a mouse
is a different question than what would the halakhah be if such a most
did exist.

Like discussions 20 years ago about the babirusa. Rabbanim were asked
what the din would be of this boar that chews its cud. They gave various
opinions. Whether or not it turns out that the babirusa really is a
cud-chewing boar, those pesaqim are correct application of halakhah. Just
perhaps to a hypothetical situation.

Gut Voch!
-mi

-- 
Micha Berger             Like a bird, man can reach undreamed-of
micha@aishdas.org        heights as long as he works his wings.
http://www.aishdas.org   But if he relaxes them for but one minute,
Fax: (270) 514-1507      he plummets downward.   - Rav Yisrael Salanter

From: L. E. Levine
>Reb Mendel M'Riminov said that saying Parshas Ha'monn (Shneyim Mikroh
> V'Echod Targum) on Tuesday Parshas B'Shalach, is a Segulah for Parnasah.

SBA: One of our yungeliet was trying to find a source for this, ie where
actually does RMM'R say this? Can anyone help?
......................................................
LEL: I have a question about this. How does doing this fit with the
statement that our Parnassa is decided on Rosh Hashanah?
If what we will get is already decided, then how can saying
this change anything? Or, is it perhaps a Segulah for next year's
Parnassa?
We non-Chassidic types tend to have problems with these sorts of
things. :-)

SBA:
I sent this question out to a few on my email list.
Here is a compilation of responses:

1) The Mekor [ie source for the segula] is only verbal. RM"M said
'torah' for 22 years on Parsha Hamon.

We pray every day for Parnosoh, so I don't really understand that Kashe.
Do non-chosids also doubt in saying BORECH OLEINI?

See Tashbatz B'SHEM YERUSHALMI that saying Parshas Hamon everyday is a
Guarantee for Parnosoh.

[Tashbetz Katan 256, "Yerushalmi...Kol ho'omer Parshas hamon bechol yom
 muvtach hu shelo yismaatu mezonosov,  ve'ani areiv..."
[The Tashbatz was a member of Areivim ...!?   -SBA]

2) VERY GOOD QUESTION..........BUT OUR YIDDISHKEIT IS FULL OF THINGS
THAT OUR SMALL BRAIN DOES NOT UNDERSTAND........
FIRST THING IS THAT IF ERLICHE YIDEN SAY IT ..IT MUST BE RIGHT AND DO
IT EVEN WITH THE QUESTIONS.......
ONCE YOU'VE SAID IT THEN OF COURSE YOU MAY ASK..... .I REFER YOU TO
THE YIDISH TAPE OF THE OLD STORY OF THE BAAL SHEM TOV WITH CHAIKEL DE
VASER TREIGER

3) There is an halochoh in Shulchan Oruch re saying Parshes Hamon
every day - and what about all davening every day. The Rishonim already
discuss this

4) Did mr levine not yet hear of "mezayanasov shel odom is
reconsidered/judged daily ?!

5) " We non-Chassidic types tend to have problems with these sorts
of things."

Non-Chassidic types seem to have problems with befereshei maamorei Chazal.
The Talmud Yerushalmi states: " One who recites parshas HaMon every day
is assured that he will never lack food."
..this is cited in the Mishna Berura (Orach Chayim siman aleph, seif heh).

6)  Recvd from our own RAF [I don't recall seeing it posted]

>>>> R' Yosef,
It was really nice to see the segula to say parshas hamon mentioned on
your homepage (maybe the reason you posted it, is that with customers
having parnasah they will pay their bills on time?...)

But in reality, there is a segula to say parshas hamon every Tuesday,
[Source?? - SBA]
but tuesday Beshalach specificaly, has no mekor whatsoever.

This segula isn't mentioned in any sefer whatsoever, and nor do the
zekeinim recall ever hearing of this segula before 30 years ago.
Our family are descendants of the Rebbe R' Mendele of Rimanov to whom
this puported segula is accredited, and we never heard of such, though
we do have plenty of minhagim and inyanim that we do have mekubal from
the Rebbe R' Mendele.

On the other hand, there is nothing wrong with people saying at least
once a year parshas hamon, reminds them that parnassah has some kesher
to the borei kol olamim...

7) There's no m'kor for this. I've asked maariv Galicianers and eastern
Galicianers (b'non shel k'doshim), and no-one's heard of such a mesora
"in der haim".

=================

Finally let me finish with a true 'good news' story which happened
here in Melbourne - exactly 10 years ago - and at the time had huge
media coverage.

A [non-Jewish] worker in the in our 'heimishe' area - a short walk from
our shul, in fact - found a container with $200,000 in cash half buried
behind some factory - along the railway track. As he had handed it in
to the local police, it had huge media coverage.

A day or 2 later - Tuesday - Parshas Beshalach [precisely], one of our
yungeleit - who religiously observes that 'segulah' - and has a factory
in the immediate vicinity, was showing a visitor the place where that
cash was found, when - lo and behold - he too found a drum with $200,000
in it!!!!

Nu, you can imagine the tumult in the media when that 2nd fortune was
publicised, with hundreds arriving to try their luck.
[There was no more.]

http://tinyurl.com/7dxu5  and
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/8.30/lawrpt/lstories/lr060202.htm
and http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/8.30/lawrpt/lstories/lr990713.htm
[half-way down the piece]

So before we totally dismiss this segulah gpt lack of a source, remember
that it obviously worked here in Melbourne..
[Maybe the fact that we arrive at that day - before anyone else in other
parts of the world does, gives us a better chance...?]

SBA

From: Joe Socher <jsocher@gmail.com>
> The halakha stated in the Gemara is simply that in Bavel we start saying
> vetein tal umattar 60 days after after the equinox; and it has become
> accepted to use Shemuel's calculation to figure out when the equinox is.
> But how do we know that we are never supposed to correct this 
> calculation?

FWIW The Rosh notes that the 60 day criteria is Bavel-centric and the
reason it was not altered in Europe is inertia.

AS I've posted a few times, IMHO if we had a Sanhderin, this would have
undboutedly been adjusted by nowi

Kol Tuv
Regards,
RabbiRichWolpoe@aol.com

On February 10, 2006, Joe Socher wrote:
> RDRiceman & RSCoffer bring up an issue that has bothered me ever since
> I first realized it a couple years ago, and as of yet I haven't found
> a satisfactory answer (though I have several attempts); perhaps someone
> out there does have a good one.

I have some weak answers to RJS questions. Anyone please feel free to
step in and assist.

> The halakha stated in the Gemara is simply that in Bavel we start saying
> vetein tal umattar 60 days after after the equinox; and it has become
> accepted to use Shemuel's calculation to figure out when the equinox is.
> But how do we know that we are never supposed to correct this calculation?

We don't. Maybe when mashiach will come we will revert to the more
accurate Gregorian method and start on November 22. Actually, we will
all be in eretz Yisrael by then so it probably won't be nogeah by then
anyway. In EY vtu'l follows a lunar calculation (7 Cheshvan) not solar.

> Right now it is about two weeks ahead, what about when it puts the equinox
> in the dead of winter? (Since it gains a day every 128 years it will
> converge with astronomical winter solstice in another 2k years or so).

According to talmudic tradition, we only have another 234 years left for
yimos hamashiach to unfold and be fully established. Perhaps this is why
we never bothered adopting the more complicated Gregorian method (which,
to my mind, is no longer more complicated anyway because Gregory built
in a fail safe, that is, every centennial year other than one divisible
by 4, should have February 29 dropped to accommodate for the 128 year
discrepancy RJS mentions above. We had a February 29 in the year 2000)

> Incidentally, we can also figure out that this calculation was not used
> throughout the time that we were in Bavel because if it had been used
> for that long then it would be a lot further off; so either there were
> adjustments to the calculation sometime during the early period of our
> settlement there or another calculation was used.

Not that far off. Beis Yoseph, quoting the Avudraham, says that the 60th
day of tekufas Tishrei should be November 22. Beis Yoseph quoted this
in the 1500's even before Gregory's change. Gregory realized that the
Julian calendar was actually off by 14 days which brings us back to the
end of Bais Rishon. The most they could have been off from the times of
bavel to the end of Bais Rishon was three days. Thus, at worst, we would
be saying vtu'l on Dec. 8 according to Gregory's current adjustment
(he only adjusted for 10 out of the 14 days) or December 11 if he had
made the full adjustment. Probably Chazal adjusted for it anyway during
Bais Shenei. Or maybe not. (I told you my answers would be weak)

Simcha Coffer

Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org> wrote:
> Interesting, Shemu'el is also the one who warns against rabid dogs in
> Yuma 83b. (He warns against ru'ach ra'ah, thereby leading RASoloveitchik
> to conclude that what they called "ru'ach ra'ah" we would today call
> "air carrying infectious disease".)

I think it is interesting to note that eventhough RAS was a strong
proponent of TuM, he probably held that Chazal were infallible even in
matters of science.

In his book "Logic of the Heart, Logic of the Mind", RAS mentions the
Gemarah that speaks of Mazikin. Most of us assume that Mazikin refers to
some spiritual beings that perhaps no longer exist. RAS posits, however,
that Mazikin are not spiritual beings but bacteria which he tries to
show from the context of the statement.

It would seem from this that RAS held that Chazal knew much of science
as we know it today. Only that they expressed it in different terms such
as... bacteria really being Mazikin. It is not hard to conclude that RAS
held that all matters of science quoted by Chazal are misunderstood by
us are are in fact true but have to be properly understood.

HM

On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 06:22:09PM -0500, Rich, Joel wrote:
: All very interesting, and repeatable. Has anyone tried these methods,
: what was the degree of accuracy?

Wouldn't that depend on the precision of the equipment? (Which we don't
know.)

On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 09:36:34AM -0500, M Cohen quotes
<http://www.meorot.co.il/archive/en338.pdf>:
: The Gaonim (cited in Meiri, here; Teshuvos HaGaonim 28, 314) explain
: that his tool was a narrow tube...
: An object was placed at an exact distance of two thousand amos from
: the holder of the tube. The tube was slowly raised until it could see
: the bottom of the object, but no farther. R' Gamliel marked the angle
: that the tube was held in order to view this object. From then on, he
: was able to determine the distance of any object, by holding the tube
: at the same angle. This method was only effective when viewing objects
: on a straight plane.

: In his commentary to the Mishna, the Rambam seems to suggest that the
: tool was more complicated than this. He writes that there is no need
: to explain at length the specifics of this tool. Those familiar with
: trigonometry...
: There are six parts to any triangle: three sides and three
: angles. According to the calculations developed by mathematicians, in
: almost all cases any three parts whose measures are known can be used
: to find the measures of the other three parts, if at least one of the
: known parts is a side....

I do not see how these two shitos differ. Except that the Rambam might
be saying that the math can compensate for an object that is higher or
lower than you. But that wouldn't change the description of the device.

I still like my idea about piholes and focus distance, since Alhazen was
working on that very idea during Rabban Gamliel's lifetime. It would mean
pinhole optics was a "hot topic" among natural philsophers at the time,
and focus a subject people were experimenting with.

Gut Voch!
-mi

-- 
Micha Berger             For a mitzvah is a lamp,
micha@aishdas.org        And the Torah, its light.
http://www.aishdas.org                   - based on Mishlei 6:2
Fax: (270) 514-1507      

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


[ 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         ]