Avodah Mailing List

Volume 17 : Number 022

Wednesday, April 26 2006

• Re:It's raining in Israel
• Re: Korban Pesach
• Re: how the Mishna Berurah became so popular
• Re: Korban Pesach
• Re: mishum eivah
• Re: Sukkos [was: Mitzvas Matzah (was Seventh Day of Pesach on Friday)]
• Re: Tinoq Shenishba
• Re: Mesirah for social annoyances
• Re: mishum eivah
• mishum eivah
• Re: Forks in the Road to the Seder
• Re: Korban Pesach
• RE: Sukkos [was: Mitzvas Matzah (was Seventh Day of Pesach on Friday)]
• Yishtabach (was: V'imru Amen in shmoneh esrei)
• Sha"ch / Ta"z
• Oseh Maasei Bereishis
• yayin poter kol minei mashkeh
• Re: Drifting of the Hebrew calendar
• Re: Drifting of the Hebrew calendar

On 4/24/06, Shoshana L. Boublil <toramada@bezeqint.net> wrote on Areivim
> It's raining in Israel.
...
> Can it be that we are so far distant from Eretz Yisrael that we can't
> hear her cry???
...
> Please, educate me!

Ok.

Rambam hilchos Taanis3:9 and SA siman 575:7 Nissan shel tekufo finished,
that is when the sun reaches 'mazel shor', we don't fast any more,
because rains at this time are only a sign of klolo, since no rains at
all fell since the start of the year.

When is that? Mishna Bruroh says 30 days after tkufas nissan, which is
27th April on my luach.

Therefore:
1) the time hasn't yet arrived
2) the whole issue is only when these are the first rains (don't ask me
why). This doesn't apply here.

So no need to cry!

Akiva

Reb Yisrael Medad wrote:
> Would not the geographical classification of 'derech r'choka' come into
> play here? The 15 mils, about 14.5 kilometers, distance from Jerusalem
> (see Rambam, Hilchot Korban Pesach, 5:9)? Or does the advent of cars
> and heliocopters change all that?

The gemara states explicitly that the distance is measured in millin,
not in traveling time.

Regarding the Shakh/Taz issue, the Va'ad Arba' Aratzot wanted to make the
Taz the official commentary/possek, but the Shakh won out among mitnagdim.
'hassiedim tend to be more Taz oriented, though there is no hard and
fast rule. At the end of the day, their logic counts for more than their
personal authority.

Kol tuv,
Arie Folger

From: <Phyllostac@aol.com>
> IIRC, the Gerrer Rebbe (admor miGur) told his Hassidim to learn it
> (MB). I would assume that was pre-WWII, even well before it. Since
> Gur was/is a large and powerful group, that definitely helped the MB's
> acceptance and influence. Presumably it could be seen in the context
> of the good relationship between the Chofetz Chaim and Gur,...

My father zt'l was a Gerrer chossid and when I was growing up I never
remember hearing the Mishna Berurah mentioned. It wasn't until I got
married -- I married out, married a Litvak -- that I started hearing
about the MB all the time. Four years ago, when my father was very ill
-- in fact, this was just a few days before his petirah -- my brother
asked my father which was the most valuable sefer in his library.
He pointed to a sefer on the top shelf of one bookcase, which my brother
took down and looked at. To my surprise, it was a first edition of
the Mishna Berurah, and had belonged to my father's father.

--Toby  Katz
=============

On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 11:00:31PM +0000, Arie Folger wrote:
: The gemara states explicitly that the distance is measured in millin,
: not in traveling time.

For bein hashemashos, we discuss 3/4 mil as a unit of time. Also, as
already noted ROY holds that tefillas haderekh is based on mil as a unit
of time. Is the gemara explicit that the millin in question are distance,
not the time to walk that distance?

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 12th day, which is
micha@aishdas.org        1 week and 5 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Hod sheb'Gevurah: What aspect of judgment
Fax: (270) 514-1507                  forces the "judge" into submission?

"Eli Turkel" <eliturkel@gmail.com>:
> My question is whether there is such a concept with regard to other
> Jews.

Chagigo 22a eivo between chaveirim and amei hooretz

Akiva

R' Jacob Farkas wrote:
> Ba'al HaMaor in Arvei P'sahim asks why we don't recite Al Akhilas
> Matzah after the first night just like we recite Leisheiv B'sukkah all
> seven days of Sukkos, after all we learn from one another that first
> night is obligatory the latter days are R'shus. He responds that unlike
> Pessah where one could survive easily the rest of Yom Tov without eating
> bread, it is impossible to go 3 days without sleep, so one is "forced"
> to dwell in a Sukkah and therefore we do recite Leisheiv B'sukkah all
> seven days of Sukkos.

I wonder then how Lubavitchers, who davka do NOT sleep in the sukka (why
not, BTW?), can ever make a bracha "leishev basukka"? Evidently they do
not consider the "leishev" to have anything to do with sleeping. (?)

 -Toby  Katz
=============

R' Micha Berger wrote:
> ... a textbook tinoq shenishba did have exposure to
> the Judaism of the towns his band of listim terrorized.

But was the *textbook* tinoq shenishba aware that he was Jewish himself?

That's a serious question. I don't know and have always wondered about that case. I'd imagine that if he was not aware of his Jewishness, then we can't expect him to have paid any attention to any Judaism that he obeserved.

Or are there poskim who take such a hard line on this question, to hold that a person who was raised thinking he was non-Jewish, upon learning that he really *is* Jewish, is suddenly responsible to accept upon himself all the things that he had previously seen no reason to pay any attention to?

Akiva Miller

R' Jacob Farkas wrote:
> ... I did notice that "heimishe" businesses continued to
> call with prerecorded messages advertising their goods
> and services. This is the only form of telemarketing
> that has persisted in spite of my registration with
> the do not call registry. ... I have been hesitant to
> report this abuse as I figured that this could be
> borderline Mesirah. ...

and asked:

> 3) Taking the violators to Beis Din does not make any
> sense, as there is no Halakha that states you can't 'cold
> call' an individual, the violation is an FTC violation,
> not a crime in the true sense, BD may not even have the
> jurisdiction to stop someone from placing these calls.

> 5) Is the annoyance of having a phone disturb you worthy
> of Halakhic consideration, after all, the phone rings for
> many reasons, friends, family, etc. ...

I'd suggest that this is more than an annoyance. It is gezel zman. I don't know it that is actionable in Beis Din, but I suspect that it might be. I'm aware of an example where, for example, one person embarrassed another, and the beis din paskened that he must issue a public apology. So perhaps this too can be brought to beis din.

Akiva Miller

From: "Eli Turkel" <eliturkel@gmail.com>
> I thank David but the cases are not comparable. The gemara in Yoma is
> talking about 2 candidates for Cohen Gadol and one is not chosen because
> of "Eivah".  <snip>
> The case we are talking about is violating an issur derbbanan because
> otherwise it would cause enmity in other Jews who are not included.

Reread the gemara. The case is a mashuah milhama who is not permitted
to fulfill the mitzvath aseh of working in the beith hamikdash (partly)
mishum eivah. It's not such a stretch to compare failing to fulfill an
aseh d'orayysa with violating an issur d'rabbanan.

David Riceman 

RET writes: 
> Moshe brought down the concept of mishum eivah as applying to chilonim.
> My question is whether there is such a concept with regard to other Jews.

...

 Does anyone know of a heter to allow a rabbinical
> prohibition in shabbat (for example) because of possible eivah from
> other Jews?

How about the matters I discuss in Avodah Vol 16 #95 in a post entitled
"Everyone on the same level" and in particular:

"The Beis Yosef (in Yoreh Deah siman 112) who brings an "Ashkenazi
teshuva" in the name of Rabbi Simcha that it is permitted to eat the bread
of a non Jew even in circumstances where non Jewish bread is forbidden
(rabbinically) if one is together with people who eat such bread with
the reason one can partake mishum aiva, - as we see from the Yerushalmi
in Demai that permits in the case of a seudas mitzvah.

The relevant Mishna in Demai(perek 4 mishna 2), states that, despite
the fact that if one buys produce from an am ha'aretz one is required
to tithe it, and cannot eat of it until it is tithed (because their is a
rabinical prohibition on the produce until retithed, because a minority
of amei ha'aretz were lax about tithing) , if one is invited by an am
ha'aretz in circumstances in which one is unable to tithe (ie on shabbat)
one can still eat his food. The Yerushalmi on this mishna appears to
clarify this by explaining that it is referring to a wedding feast or
such like and the reason it is permitted is meshum aivah. However the
Rambam in hilchos ma'aseh perek 12 halacha 3 appears to take the view that
not just a wedding feast falls within this category but on any shabbat
(see the comment of the nose kelim there and elsewhere).

The Rema brings this l'halacha in Yoreh Deah siman 112 si'if 15 "One who
is careful regarding the bread of non Jews and eats with others who aren't
careful, it is permitted to eat with them mishum aivah v'katita [quarrel]
since if he did not eat bread with them since it is the essence of the
meal they permitted it to him mishum aiva, but we don't learn from here
to other issurim.

The Shach explains this reference to "other issurim" as being even butter
of non Jews and similarly where the custom is to forbid even though we
are lenient in relation to this issur as we learn above in siman 115,
but it is davka with bread that there is aivah because "al lechem chai
adam" but not other foods because there are many people who do not desire
to eat butter and the like.

The Gra's comment on this siman is similar: that butter is forbidden in
this situation but that bread is different because it is the essence
of the meal and we say in perek 4 of Pesachim that even to be lenient
we change minhagim because of maklokus etc because it is not an issur
d'orisa [Torah prohibition] like the Rosh says (51b it relates to the
importance of not letting minhagim get in the way of darkei shalom)
But in the case of butter it is the opposite because there are many in
the marketplace who won't eat butter."

And as mentioned there, the Sde Chemed brings all of this in relation
to explaining the basis in which the gedolei yisroel were prepared to
eat at the houses of baalei baatim who were not careful regarding the
heating/reheating of food on shabbat. And while he brings the Zachor
L'Avraham as holding that what the Beis Yosef is allowing is only eating
of bread (or in the case of the gedolei yisroel, eating food on shabbat)
where there is a chance [chashash] that that particular food falls into
this category, because these people tend not to be careful about these
things, but not where it is known that this particular item suffers
from this defect, the Sde Chemed disagrees with the Zachor L'Avraham
there and holds that there is a general principle that aivah pushes away
d'rabbanans (see there).

Regards 
Chana Luntz

[Micha:]
> When are you happier -- at your own daughter's chasunah, or at someone
> else's? Why? Your love for your daughter. This in turn informs fear;
> one is more scared of what the shidduch will bring when it's one's own
> child. And it's because of that fear, because of the realization of the
> magnitude of the event, that the event can hold the joy it does.

Rav Chaim Friedlander in the P'sicha to Sifsei Chaim, Midos Va'avodas
Hashem Aleph* illustrates a similar point with a mashal of a child riding
on a father's back. The more the father loves the child, the more scared
he is that the child will fall.

Update: I looked up the source, and he quotes the same page in B'ikvos
Hayir'ah as you do! It's amazing when that happens!

About Sifsei Chaim: Many people don't know that there are more than
3 volumes. There is Moadim 1,2,3, Emunah v'hashgacha, Emuna Ub'chirah,
and Midos va'avodas Hashem 1,2. Some of them are quite new. They are
all excellent, from what I've seen.

Michael Y. Kopinsky
m1@kopinsky.com

Zev Sero:
> ...up to the gates of Damascus...

As opposed to today, when it stretches to Damascus Gate.

On April 25, 2006, T613K@aol.com wrote:

> R' Jacob Farkas wrote:
> > Ba'al HaMaor in Arvei P'sahim asks why we don't recite Al Akhilas
> > Matzah after the first night just like we recite Leisheiv B'sukkah all
> > seven days of Sukkos, after all we learn from one another that first
> > night is obligatory the latter days are R'shus. He responds that unlike
> > Pessah where one could survive easily the rest of Yom Tov without eating
> > bread, it is impossible to go 3 days without sleep, so one is "forced"
> > to dwell in a Sukkah and therefore we do recite Leisheiv B'sukkah all
> > seven days of Sukkos.

> I wonder then how Lubavitchers, who davka do NOT sleep in the sukka (why
> not, BTW?), can ever make a bracha "leishev basukka"? Evidently they do
> not consider the "leishev" to have anything to do with sleeping. (?)

It's not a kasha. Do you sleep in the succah? And yet you make a leishaiv.
The issue is that there is a chiyuv me'ikar hadin to sleep in the succah. In
colder climates there is a petur of teishvu ki'ayn taduru which absolves one
from the chiyuv of sheyna basuccah but the tzura of the mitzvah remains
unchanged. Lubavitchers don't claim that there is no chiyuv to sleep in the
succah. They quote one of the previous Rabbeim as having said "how can one
sleep in the succah when all the oros of makifin d'bina are present." You
know Chassidim..."kayvan d'nafik mepumey d'rav" it becomes an official
Lubavitcher minhag. How they justify extending the petur of sleeping in the
succah from a Rebbe who apparently "saw" things in the succah that didn't
allow him to sleep to all of the Chassidim who, I'm sure, do not have this
"problem" is beyond my ability to explain. As far as I'm concerned, it
doesn't make halachic sense.

Simcha Coffer

Zev Sero <zev@sero.name> wrote:
>>: Amen as an ending was used at the end of sections of prayer....

>> I thought only for the conclusion of strings of berakhos hasemuchot  
>> lechavertot.

> Yishtabach?

[R' Ken Bloom:]
> Yishtabach is connected to Baruch She'amar, which is why we are forbidden
> to interrupt during psukei d'zimra.

It's also why Yishtabach doesn't start with Baruch.

Michael Y. Kopinsky
m1@kopinsky.com

Here are links to Hebrew articles from Wikipedia (FWIW), about the Shach
and Taz, which state their years of birth and death as:
Shach - 1621-1662 <http://tinyurl.com/n4ckn>
Taz - 1586 - 1687 <http://tinyurl.com/of4v8>

Kol tuv,
Amihai Bannett

P.S. I am back at Avodah after about 5 years. We now live in Bet Shemesh
after a 4 year shlichut in Winnipeg. Would be happy to catch up with
the vatikim off-list.

Mon, 6 Mar 2006 "Aryeh Englander" <iarwain1@earthlink.net> posted:
> I've been wondering what exactly are the gedarim for when you say the
> brachah of Oseh Maasei Bereishis.... And for rivers: ...if any river,
> what about a volcano that grew up in historical memory - that wasn't
> there since Maasei Bereishis so do you make a bracha on it? ...

To focus on just this question, being unable to answer the numerous
other fascinating ones RALE raised:

The fact that we make the beracha on lightning indicates that the
presence of the particular thing (in physical actuality) at MB is not a
criterion. The lightning flash one sees reminds one of the "Yehi Ohr"
at Maaseh Beraishis;" AFAIK it was never thought that the flash is a
remnant of it. Also, the "Oseh" of MB arguably refers to the One Who is
replicating and/or maintaining MB now in the present, not "The One Who
[in the past] created (in actual or potential)" what we are seeing now.

Zvi Lampel

We all know that once you make the bracha on wine/grape juice you
need not make a bracha on another drink. My son asked about arvus.
If someone says amen to Friday night kiddush can he drink something on
which the bracha is normally shehakol without making a bracha? What if
there's no context of kiddush (i.e. birchas hamitzva) and it's a communal
birchas hanehenin?

David Riceman 

On Areivim, Moshe Feldman <moshe.feldman@gmail.com> wrote:
> Any comments on this article?-
> http://individual.utoronto.ca/kalendis/hebrew/drift.htm

> << At present, the equinox-relative alignment of the first year of each
> 19-year Hebrew Calendar cycle is about 7 days later than it was at the
> adoption of the fixed arithmetic Hebrew Calendar.

Yes, this is obvious. The length of a solar year is 365.2422 days.
The Jewish calendar approximates this as 235/19 months, which comes to
365.2468 days. Therefore the calendar drifts forward by 0.0046 days a
year, and over the course of the ~1700 years since Hillel II, that adds
up to 7.82 days. It cannot be otherwise. Presumably the next Sanhedrin
will readjust things.

> In the present era Passover falls later than the Chodesh haAviv (first
> month of spring) limit specified in the Torah more than 20% of the time. By
> Hebrew year 7800 Passover will be beyond Chodesh ha-Aviv in more than 50% of
> years. By around 6000 years after Hillel II, Passover will always be later
> than Chodesh haAviv - in that sense, the Traditional Hebrew Calendar will
> have "expired" by then.>>

The author assumes here 1) that "chodesh ha'aviv" means the *first* 30
days after the equinox, and 2) that Pesach must fall within this period.
I dispute both assumptions. "Shamor et chodesh ha'aviv" means that the
*chodesh*, i.e. Rosh Chodesh, must fall in the Aviv, i.e. after the
equinox. Nor must it be within 30 days of the equinox; it's fine for
it to be later than that. The proof for this is that bizman habayit
they used to declare leap years for several reasons. The equinox was
one reason, but even when Rosh Chodesh would fall after the equinox
they would still declare leap years if the roads were too muddy, or the
lambs were too young, or the barley crop would not be ripe for the Omer.
Obviously in such cases both Rosh Chodesh and Pesach would fall more
than a month after the equinox. And yet the gemara seems to have no
problem with this. This proves that there is no requirement for either
Rosh Chodesh or Pesach to be in the first 30 days after the equinox.

-- 
Zev Sero
zev@sero.name

On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 01:42:11PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
:                       The length of a solar year is 365.2422 days.
: The Jewish calendar approximates this as 235/19 months, which comes to
: 365.2468 days. Therefore the calendar drifts forward ...

: The author assumes here 1) that "chodesh ha'aviv" means the *first* 30
: days after the equinox, and 2) that Pesach must fall within this period.
: I dispute both assumptions....

As you did here in the past, too. We disagreed on the implications of Rav
Huna as understood by Rashi, but even after you straightened out my math
and my confusion due to double negatives, neither of us gave a criterion
THAT strict. And besides, do we necessarily hold like Rav Huna, or can
Pesach be in a month that begins any time between the vernal equanox
and the summer solstice?

See <http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol14/v14n056.shtml#01> and
subsequent discussion.

Also, since Tequfas Shemu'el is more off, it (and the Julian Calendar)
drifted by 13 days, so that there is a relative drift of 6 days between
the calendar and the tequfah.

So, there are years in which Pesach is in the 2nd possible month instead
of the first. But as RSZ writes, it's not "broken" yet.

BTW, the slippage isn't simply a number. Each year in the 19 yr cycle,
plus Chechvan-Kisleiv effects, will have a different relationship from
the mean to Rosh Chodesh Nissan. The first failure would have been
(if we didn't know there would be a Sanhedrin by then) in the latest
possible year of the round.

Which brings me around to another thread...

On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 10:59:44PM +0300, Moshe Feldman wrote:
:                                          The question is whether siman
: k'lalah depends just on the Hebrew months or also on the solar calendar
: (which is what the weather system is connected to).

On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 09:14:30PM +0200, Akiva Blum wrote:
: Rambam hilchos Taanis3:9 and SA siman 575:7 Nissan shel tekufo finished,
: that is when the sun reaches 'mazel shor', we don't fast any more...
: When is that? Mishna Bruroh says 30 days after tkufas nissan, which is
: 27th April on my luach.

It's not tied to the Jewish calendar, it's tied to the
tequfah. Unfortunately, that too could mean three things (one of which
would be the same thing lema'aseh as RMF's suggestion):

1- The actual seasons, as that is what the weather is tied to.
2- Tequfas Shemu'el, which is the estimate usually used when we speak
of tequfos. This would start the window for the qelalah 13 days later.
3- Tequfas Rav Adda, which is what we use for the calendar, and therefore
shares the same 7 days slippage.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 13th day, which is
micha@aishdas.org        1 week and 6 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Yesod sheb'Gevurah: To what extent is judgment
Fax: (270) 514-1507                   necessary for a good relationship?

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


[ 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         ]