Avodah Mailing List

Volume 17 : Number 097

Wednesday, July 26 2006

• historical contingency and brachos
• Re: historical contingency and brachos
• Hostages
• Re: MB/Yeshiva Communities
• Re: Eli Tziyon tune
• Re: Music
• Re: Music during the Three Weeks
• Re: Music
• Re: Rav Soloveitchik on Holocaust Kinot
• Re: Rav Soloveitchik on Holocaust Kinot
• Ir haSemucha leSefar and pikuach nefesh--continued
• Re: Kiris
• Noshim daatan kalos
• Re: tzedakah for non-Jews
• Re: malawach
• Re: historical contingency and brachos
• Eid Echad Ne'eman B'Issurin
• Re: historical contingency and brachos
• RE: Noshim daatan kalos
• Re: Waiting to Daven Maariv on Shavuous
• Re: Music during the Three Weeks

> Another example would be a fruit cup, made of 3/4 of a kezayis of
> grapes, and 1/4 of a kezayis of pineapple. The grapes are the ikar and
> HaEtz is the bracha rishona for the whole thing. But can one say Al
> HaEtz afterward? I'm guessing that Rav Moshe would say not

Bad example in an otherwise excellent post. Pineapple is of course adama;
if one substitutes in your example 1/4 cup of apple, the halacha pesuka
is to make al ha'etz, no guesswork necessary.

Gershon
gershon.dubin@juno.com

> There are two totally
> unrelated topics which are too easily confused. The first is ikar/tafel,
> in the sense that making a bracha on the ikar also covers the tafel. The
> second is how to measure the shiur for bracha acharona. It is an easy
> trap to confuse these issues, but they really have nothing to do with
> each other.

If one takes a sip (less than a revi'it) of wine at kiddush, and then
drinks other liquids, the hagafen of the wine covers all the other drinks,
but the beracha acharona is borei nefashot, not al hagafen.

 -- 
Zev Sero
zev@sero.name

The gemara in Gittin (45a) reports the case of Levi bar darga as an
example of paying greater than market value for a hostage but rejects it
(Abaye) based on "dilma shelo bratzon chachamim avad". I could find
no other mention of Levi nor any other place in shas where an example
is rejected on this basis. Why would the gemara assume that an action
was not bratzon chachamim unless it knew it (the fact that it occurred
was obviously known, if the chachamim objected wouldn't that have been
mesora as well?)

KT
Joel Rich

From: <kennethgmiller@juno.com>
> Second: If the Anshei Kneses Hagedola merely defined the subject matter of
> each bracha, and allowed many variant texts, then how do we understand the
> prohibition against changing the "matbea" which they established? Doesn't
> that clearly refer to their fixed text?

See Menorath HaMaor by Al Nakawa, ed. Enelow, vol. 2, pp. 126-128.

David Riceman 

I posted a link to a recording of the Western tradition on my blog:
<http://lipmans.blogspot.com>.

Maybe we're talking about different tunes, but I don't find this tune
in three four time particularly march-like.

Lipman Phillip Minden

> I saw a discussion in the Yated a few months ago in which R. Y. Belsky
> stated that even acapella recording now considered music and assur. This
> is becasue it is digitally mastered with imperfections removed and thus
> becomes a recording, perfomred by an instrument and included in the
> issur of music.
...
> WADR to HaRav Belsky, I fail to see the leap here. That anyone would
> think, let alone Paskin that an accapella recording is more entertainig
> than a live accapella performance is mind boggling.

I am not an expert but I believe it has to do with mastering the sound
so that it is properly pitched and also to remove breathing sounds and
the like. He considers a recording of such sound to have been produced by
an instrument and therefore to be instrumental music. The logic is good,
IMO, but yuo can argue on other grounds.

Meir Levin

R' Shlomo Miller assered a capella because of Maris Ayin, not because
he considered it to have the status of music, but because people who
don't know the halacha will think that it is mutar to listen to music
with instruments.

 -Shmuel

Mon, 24 Jul 2006  from: Harry Maryles <>
>  That anyone would
> think, let alone Paskin that an accapella recording is more entertainig
> than a live accapella performance is mind boggling.

Personally, I consider well-produced and edited audio and video recordings
of concerts to be much better, quality- and entertainment-wise.

Zvi Lampel

Tue, 25 Jul 2006 from: ""Menachem Butler"" <menachembutler@hotmail.com>
> The following selection is from pages 298-299 of ""The Lord is Righteous
> in All His Ways: Reflections on the Tish'ah be-Av Kinot"" (edited by
> Rabbi Jacob J. Schacter).
>> ...In fact, an imitation of a kinah was written for those killed by
> Hitler in the 1940s, and not badly written.

>> Some rabbis in Eretz Yisrael accepted it, but I do not like it. I do not
>> like new "prayers." I cannot use it because, in my opinion, there is no
>> one, no contemporary, who has all the qualities indispensable for writing
>> prayers. I am always reluctant to accept new compositions...

Did Rav Soloveitchik hold the same regarding the Tefillah LaMedinah?

Zvi Lampel

On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 02:14:32PM -0400, Zvi Lampel wrote:
: Did Rav Soloveitchik hold the same regarding the Tefillah LaMedinah?

Yes.

And, BTW, to those students who insisted on saying it or didn't want
to start a battle with mispallelim over it, RYBS suggested they insert
the word "shetehei", as in "bareikh es Medinas Yisrael shetehei reishis
tzemichas ge'ulaseinu". (Was that the first time that line was ever
transliterated in Ashkenazis? <g>) RYBS had very strong problems, beyond
those he had with other tefillos, with what sounds like a prophetic
proclamation about the fate of the state.

This has to do with a machloqes in MO and DL kehillos about the religious
meaning of the Medinah. R' Reines (the founder of Mizrachi) and RYBS,
and in fact many religious Zionists including ROY, the basis is NOT
eschatological. It was R' AY Kook, and further his son R ZY Kook who
developed the messianic flavor of DL thought that seems to be the more
popular among the masses in Israel and the US. Mizrachi/NRP has certainly
become the party of RZYK in both hashkafah and policy, but I don't think
the moderator would let me discuss that any further on the grounds of
"politics"... <g>

 -mi

 -- 
Micha Berger                 Life is complex.
micha@aishdas.org                Decisions are complex.
http://www.aishdas.org               The Torah is complex.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                                - R' Binyamin Hecht

Concerning the location of Ir haSemucha leSefar, R. Yehonatan is singular
in writing "bein gevul Eretz Yisrael ligevul haumot." Rashi does not
write "Eretz." Also, the girsa of Rif, Meorot, Semak, Orchot Chaim and
Meiri (in Bet Habechira) is "nachrim shetzaru al 'ayarot shel Yisrael',"
meaning "towns of Jews," not necessarily in EY. This can even be the
meaning of Rambam etc. who read "ayarot Yisrael," as evidenced by Sefer
haAgudah and Chidushei haMeiri to Eiruvin (a separate work from Beit
haBechira) who also read "ayarot Yisrael" but nevertheless write that
the reason is pukuach nefesh-- which applies everywhere.

In Bnei Banim I brought a number of proofs from various sugiot that Ir
haSemucha leSefar is even in Chutz Laaretz.

The language of the teshuva of the Rogachover is "... meichamat din
shel kivush Eretz Yisrael bilvad chas veshalom lidchot Shabbat...Ir
haSemucha leSefar...zeh hu geder machteret..." i.e. pikuach nefesh,
contrary to what he wrote years previously,

    With Torah blessings,
    Yehuda Henkin

In Avodah 75:17, RSBA asks about "Kiris" in Targum Pseudo-Jonathan at
Bamidbar 11:26. I haven't noticed a response to this on Avodah so I am
submitting this.

"Kiris," and the word following it, are Greek words. Kiris is the Greek
"Kurios," meaning lord, (often) used by the Septuagint where the Hebrew
has shem Hashem (there are at least 3500 times the Greek word is used in
the Septuagint, against 6639 of shem Hashem in Tanakh). Aside from our
case, it is used in Targum Yonatan also at Tehilim 53:1; 97:10; 114:7;
Iyov 3:19; 5:2. Apparently, it is never used by other rabbinic works
(although many other Greek words *are* used throughout sifrut Hazal).

The word following Kurios in our case is the Greek "etimos" meaning near,
ready, present. It is used by the Septuagint at least seven times where
the Hebrew has the word "nakhon" (viz. Ex 34:2; 1Sam 13:21; 1Sam 26:4; 1K
2:45; Ps 16:12; 37:18; 92:2). It is used elsewhere in rabbinic literature
at Bereshit Rabba 48:7 (and parallels) and Targum Yonatan at VaYikra 14:7;
Iyov 7:12; 15:22, 24.

Now, why this Greek phrase meaning "Hashem is near" was used in this
context, and not some Hebrew/Aramaic alternative, I do not know.

Bi-derishat shelom Tsiyon u-venotehah uve-tsipiyah li-teshu`ah me-et
Mena.hem Tsiyon u-Voneh Yerushalayim,
Yisrael Dubitsky  

It's pashut to me that the reason why women are not accepted as witnesses
when two witnesses are required is because daatan kalos. I don't have
a raayah off hand.

It's also pashut to me that the Torah considers two eidim to be the
strongest type of testimony and it's not just a technicality.

Although I'm aware of some question of whether two witnesses by a
kidushin are simply testifying that the kedushin took place or whether
they are some sort of ceremonial witnesses. It seems to me that p'shat
is that an isha is gomar umakneh nafshoh when it is clear to her that
there are solid witnesses who are watching. And therefore it is the fact
that two witnesses are such solid evidence of something happening that
gives their presence so much meaning and it is not separable from the
fact that they are solid witnesses.

As far as whether the reason for women not being required to testify
because they shouldn't have to put themselves at risk because they have
to care for their children: I don't think that there is any source for
such a statement.

 -Shmuel

In v17n86 (12-Jul-06), I wrote:
: Darkhei Shalom is, according to R' Aharon Lichtenstein, part of
: "vehalakhta bidrakhav"...

: See RnCL's wonderful discussion of R' Unterman's raayos for the idea
: <http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol05/v05n001.shtml#11>. Also, as she
: notes, a perusal of the phrase's usage as listed in the Encyc. Talmudit
: will clearly show that it doesn't resemble mishum eivah.

R Zvi Dovid Hoffman argues the point from the fact that it's mipenei
(darkei* shalom, not siply "mipenei shalom". See the translation at
<http://www.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/hoffman.pdf> scanned and posted
by R Prof Yitzhok Levine. (Original source: Fundamentals of Judaism,
edited by Jacob Breuer.)

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger             One doesn't learn mussar to be a tzaddik,
micha@aishdas.org        but to become a tzaddik.
http://www.aishdas.org                         - Rav Yisrael Salanter
Fax: (270) 514-1507      

On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 20:27:07, Dr. Josh Backon <backon@vms.huji.ac.il>
wrote on Areivim:
> I'm truly surprised that 2 posters (R. Reuven Koss and Rabbanit
> Boublil) indicated that the bracha over malawach is HA'MOTZI. Two
> sources (including the "Madrich Brachot ha'Nehenin" published by
> Mossad Eliezer Hofner and based on the Chayei Adam Dinei Birchot
> haNehenin; he also quotes the Mishna Brura and Aruch haShulchan)
> indicate that the proper bracha is BOREI MINEI MEZONOT.
...

R. Shlomo Levi (Rosh Kollel of Yeshivat Har Etzion), in his Kuntres
Birchat HaPat, says that the bracha is hamotzi. He reasons that
the amount of oil is not large enough for this to be considered
frying--rather, it is considered to have been baked, even though it is
prepared in a pan (not an oven). Also, the dough is not a blilah rakah.
Although the oil/margarine is tasted, this does not change the fact that
this is a meal food, not a desert food.

Kol tuv,
Moshe

> If one takes a sip (less than a revi'it) of wine at kiddush, and
> then drinks other liquids, the hagafen of the wine covers all the other
> drinks,but the beracha acharona is borei nefashot, not al hagafen.

Most poskim hold that yayin poter kol minei mashkeh means at least a
reviis, perhaps even to kevius al hayayin.

Gershon
gershon.dubin@juno.com

[Re: the case of a butcher maitaining he should be trusted to say he had
salted his meat, even though chemical analysis disagreed, on the basis
of eid echad ne'eman b'issurim, snipped]

I had written:
> It would seem the 
> butcher had no claim anyway, since he himself was the single witness 
> and is nogeia b'davar. Otherwise, there would never be a need for a 
> mashgiach to check whether a manufacturer's ingredients had a hechsher 
> printed on their packages. Just ask the employees! So the issue is not 
> the validity of using scientific methods. 

After consultation with my friend R' Eliyahu W. Ferrell, a full-time
kashrus professional, I submit the following correction:

Eid Echad Ne'eman B'Issurin applies even to a frum restaurant
owner-operator testifying about the restaurant. The fact it is his
parnassa does not ruin the ne'emonus.

Nevertheless, a genuine Rav haMachshir objectively verifies the kashrus
of the food he certifies and therefore must disregard the testimony of
the frum restaurant owner-operator whose restaurant he certifies. Thus
the legitimacy of verifying that meat was properly salted, despite
the butcher's "eidus" that it was. (And thus the emergence of the
issue of using scientific devices to determine metsius, t determine
halachic status, as originally stated in the post to which I responded
erroneously.)

In Europe, I am told, this whole idea of having a Rav hamachshir and
mashgiach was unheard of. At least it was not widespread. Today as well,
just as we (or some of us....) trust our friends' kashrus, we can trust
establishments owned and operated by Torah-observant people who know
what they need to know about producing kosher food.

This sheds light on the controversies in the beginnings of kashrus
supervision in America, attempted by Rabbi Yaakov Yosef when he came
from Europe and found the kashrus situation in shambles. I don't recall
seeing&n bsp;if something prompted him to question the ne'emonus of the
"kosher" food purveyers, leading him to investigate the situation, or if
it was simply manifest. In any case, we can visualize the outrage facing
him from the food purveyers, claiming that there was never such a thing in
the "alter heim," and doesn't he know that "eid echad ne'eman b'issurin,"
and he is just creating a racket to make money. (Although I seem to
recall reading that there was some of this in Europe as well, although
not of course to the extent we have it today in America and elsewhere.)

A related point: In my discussion Rabbi Ferrell, we came up with the
lucrative and brilliant idea of producing "LampelWare," -- plastic
utensils with a hechsher! If plastic film ("Saran Wrap," etc.) can get
a hechsher, how can you eat a chicken that's a mammash davar gush and
yad soledes bo, without knowing that the plastic fork you stuck into it
is certified kosher?! Only "LampelWare" has kosher certification! (I've
seen kosher certification on plasticware for Pesach, but I'm talking
year-'round!) Any backers?

Zvi Lampel 

Gershon Dubin wrote:
>>If one takes a sip (less than a revi'it) of wine at kiddush, and
>>then drinks other liquids, the hagafen of the wine covers all the other
>>drinks,but the beracha acharona is borei nefashot, not al hagafen.

>Most poskim hold that yayin poter kol minei mashkeh means at least a
>reviis, perhaps even to kevius al hayayin.

I am not sure anyone requires a reviis - at most a melo lugmuv.
See in this article
<http://www.ou.org/publications/ja/5763/5763winter/LEGAL-EA.PDF>
note 13 tht most poskim hold a sip is sufficient.

> It's pashut to me that the reason why women are not accepted as witnesses
> when two witnesses are required is because daatan kalos. I don't have a
> raayah off hand.
> -Shmuel

See Shvuot 30a - it's a drasha so you can supply any reason you think
is pashut.

Kt
Joel rich

On Sun, Jul 02, 2006 at 12:49:23AM -0400, rabbirichwolpoe@aol.com wrote:
:> So, if we wait to temimos alst chumrah, both question disappear.
:> However here, what motivates the chumrah isn't kareis, but the lashon
:> hapasuq.

: The Meta question is how can an Acharon make a halachah from a drasha
: on a passuk? A Halachah that hs no precedent - AFAIK - in Rishonim?!

[Micha:]
> You mean like wearing your tzitzis out, as a qiyum of "ur'isem oso"?

> My whole point was that waiting for Shavuos to fill the idea of temimus
> wasn't being suggested as ikkar hadin. (Nor do I know of someone who
> says that if your tzitzis are within your pants, you aren't yotzei.)
> See my first line, above.

> Acharonim invent chumros all the time, and this wouldn't be the first
> one based on peshat in the pasuq.

It's not ONLY chumros. The Maharil invents a kula for non-married men
to not wear a Talis Gadol based upon a drasha of semuchin. And while
MB and other poskim reject this crsahs this is the popular Minhag.

So much for chumros

So much for listening to MB. 

Kol Tuv
Regards,
RabbiRichWolpoe@aol.com   

[Micha:]
> RYBS holds that the problem with music during aveilus (including also
> omer and the 3 weeks) has nothing to do with instruments, and a capella
> would be just as assur as instrumental music. OTOH, he holds it does
> have to do with dancing and parties.
...
> RANebenzahl gave a heter to attend a classical concert even during
> aveilus for a parent, r"l.

>  RANebenzahl gave a heter to attend a classical concert even during
>  aveilus for a parent, r"l.

AIUI the only problem with music is if it is at a party or is associated
with dancing.

as afar as I can tell just passively listening to music is not assur
me'ikkar hadin, although many are noheig not to listen.

Certainly during the 9 days, based upon mischenichnas av me'maitin
be'simha, any form of music is questionable. OTOH I don't see a problm
during the beginning of the 3 weeks nor with Sefira in any of the major
sources. The issue seems in having music at a party or a simncha.

Kol Tuv
Regards,
RabbiRichWolpoe@aol.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         ]