Avodah Mailing List

Volume 19: Number 6

Wed, 13 Sep 2006

• 1. Rhyming (hankman)
• 2. Henna parties (from areivim) (saul mashbaum)
• 3. Re: Phantom Chazal? (Dr. Josh Backon)
• 4. Re: Phantom Chazal? (T613K@aol.com)
• 5. Re: Sukkah GT 20 amot high (kennethgmiller@juno.com)
• 6. Re: Henna parties (from areivim) (T613K@aol.com)
• 7. Mendy Ganchrow, M.D. (steve katz)
• 8. Phantom Chazal (Allen Gerstl)
• 9. Chazal are Infallible (Kohn, Shalom)
• 10. Monsey kashrut problem (Kohn, Shalom)

Not that I can think of but at least two places play with sounds:
1. re Nechash hanechoshet -- im noshach hanachash etc

2. My father alav hashalom always pointed out: grammatically we use mah with
a patach or kamatz except in front of a guttural letter (see eg Mah anu, Meh
chayeenu in Leolam yehei adam).
One exception: in the haftorah re Shaul and Amalek Shmuel hanavi says to
Shaul:   Meh Kol Hatzon?

Why Meh and not mah?
Think about it -- what noise do sheep make? Me'e'eh
--------------------------------
CM notes:
My dikduk is almost nonexistent so I could easily be wrong, but I will stick my neck out anyway even though I would be wiser not to venture an opinion.
I was told that mah or moh precedes what we would call a vowel  while meh precedes what we would call a consonant. I imagine that a "guttural" letter = a "vowel" or is there a difference?
The point being to make pronunciation easier.

An example:  Bameh madlikin ubamoh ain madlikin

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20060911/3ee4fc02/attachment.htm

RTK wrote on areivm: 

>> 

The henna party has more to do with applying henna decorations to the hands (and hair?) than with anything else.  Henna is an Arabic word AFAIK and the Arabs also have pre-wedding henna parties.  So do Indians (in India).  Henna is believed to have something to do with fertility, and it's also considered decorative and attractive.  It also has cooling qualities.  **Apparently it stains the skin so that the color remains until the outer skin exfoliates, which can take anywhere from a few days to a few weeks.**  

>>> 

This, if true,  sounds like a serious problem of chatzitza b'tvila to me (IIAMN, the henna party often preceeds the tvila by several days). However, I do believe that a coloration which  remains over a period of time may not be consiudered a chatzitza, although I don't know how long the period of time must be. The problem may be more serious with hair, almost all of which may be colored by henna. This last point is not restricted to henna, of course, and may apply to commonly used hair dyes as well. I am not very familiar with the halachic literature on this subject, and would appreciate being directed to sources. 

Saul Mashbaum 

R. Moshe Yehuda Gluck asked:

>"One who prohibits the permitted will end up permitting the prohibited."

>Any takers?

See the Shach's Hanhagat Hora'oht Issur v'Heter in Yoreh Deah (right before
Siman 243) "k'shem she'assur l'hatir et ha'issur kach assur l'e'ssor et 
ha'muttar . . .  sh'efshar she'yitgalgel v'yavo kula ad achar me'ah d'varim".

KT

Josh

 
"Moshe Yehuda Gluck" _mgluck@gmail.com_ (mailto:mgluck@gmail.com)   writes:




"One who prohibits the permitted will end up permitting the  prohibited."



Any takers?



.
Not quite what you're looking for, but I immediately thought of "Kol  hamosif 
gorea."  I asked an erudite neighbor where to find that, and he  reminded me 
of the Rashi on Bereishis 3:3 where Chava says that they're not  allowed to 
touch the tree -- whereas they really had only been commanded not to  /eat/ the 
tree.  Rashi there quotes the Gemara, Sanhedrin 29a.   "Hosifah al hatzivui 
lefichach ba'ah liyedei geira'on."
 
Rashi there also quotes Mishlei 30:6.  "Al tosf al devarav pen  yochiach 
becha venichzavta."  And if you follow R' ArtScroll's suggestion  and go look at 
Rashi on that pasuk in Mishlei, you find this:  "PEN  YOCHIACH BECHA 
VENICHZAVTA:  Yochiach al panecha she'al yedei tosaftecha,  ata ba liyedei aveirah."  
That is, "By your adding to His words you come to  do an aveirah."

 
Kesiva vechasima tova

--Toby  Katz
=============
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20060911/ef24e454/attachment.html

R' Micha Berger wrote:
> Because one doesn't see the sekhakh, the tzeil is disconnected
> from the sekhakh. If the connection is psychological (need I
> revive the "ta'am and taste" thread?) rather than physical,
> geometry is irrelevant.

This fits nicely with the way I'm looking at it. The sechach needs to 
be above, and visible so that the connection is made.

But as regards the idea that the shade I'm sitting in has to come 
from the sechach rather than from the walls or from nearby 
buildings...

Some people (such as myself) ask about sitting by the southern wasll 
of the sukkah while in the northern hemisphere. Others (such as R' 
Chaim Manaster) take this further by asking about the sun's 
inclination in arctic regions.

The problem with this approach is that it does not go far enough. We 
have to take it to the logical conclusion. We need a case where the 
sun's inclination is such that the whole concept of "the shade of the 
sechach" has no basis in reality. Like at night!!!

It is not possible to build a sukkah in such a way that a portion of 
it is shaded by the sechach at *night*. There is no way to sit in a 
sukkah at night and be shaded by the sechach. Yet all shitos agree 
that it is possible to perform the mitzvah of living in the sukkah at 
night. Therefore, the mitzvah does not require one to actually be 
shaded by the sechach.

My conclusion is that when the halacha talks about "sitting in the 
shade of the s'chach", this is an idiomatic phrase which actually 
means, "sitting in a place which WOULD be in the shade of the s'chach 
IF the sun were directly overhead."

Akiva Miller

 
 
In a message dated 9/11/2006 3:01:43 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
smash52@netvision.net.il writes:

RTK wrote on areivm: 
>> 
The henna party has more to do with applying henna decorations to the hands  
(and hair?) than with anything else.  Henna is an Arabic word AFAIK and  the 
Arabs also have pre-wedding henna parties.  So do Indians (in  India).  Henna 
is believed to have something to do with fertility, and  it's also considered 
decorative and attractive.  It also has cooling  qualities.  **Apparently it 
stains the skin so that the color remains  until the outer skin exfoliates, 
which can take anywhere from a few days to a  few weeks.**   
>>> 
This, if true,  sounds like a serious problem of chatzitza b'tvila to  me 
(IIAMN, the henna party often preceeds the tvila by several days).  However, I do 
believe that a coloration which  remains over a period  of time may not be 
consiudered a chatzitza, although I don't know how long the  period of time must 
be. The problem may be more serious with hair, almost  all of which may be 
colored by henna. This last point is not restricted to  henna, of course, and 
may apply to commonly used hair dyes as well. I am not  very familiar with the 
halachic literature on this subject, and would  appreciate being directed to 
sources. 
Saul Mashbaum


.
I am not that familiar with the halachos either but have been a substitute  
mikva lady a few times and was told that we posken not to make a fuss if women  
show up at the mikva with fake (glued-on) fingernails, colorful polished  
manicures,  or dyed hair.  Bedieved, at least, it seems that if you  want the co
lor to be permanent, it is not a chatzitza.  The women who come  with false 
nails and dyed hair are usually Israeli/Sefardiyot, often not dati,  and I have 
been very impressed that these women still keep taharas  hamishpacha.  It's a 
tribute to the strength of the mother-to-daughter  transmission of mesorah in 
their community that they do so.  Ashkenazim who  are not observant will rarely 
use the mikva.
 
I will admit that I myself wondered about this henna thing vis-a-vis  tevila, 
when I first heard of it, years ago.  I was taught as a kallah that  there 
could be absolutely NOTHING on your skin -- you would go crazy, using  bleach, 
acetone, goo-gone and so on to get off ink stains or the slightest bit  of 
makeup residue -- and the mikva lady would insist that you cut your nails to  the 
quick -- and then to be told that actually, long nails, false nails, even  
polished nails, fake eyelashes -- none of that will invalidate the  tefila -- 
pretty strange.
 
Needless to say, I would not recommend that anyone rely on these  lenient 
opinions without first checking with her own LOR.  
 
Kesiva vechasima tova

--Toby  Katz
=============
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20060911/94365b1c/attachment-0001.htm

From http://ganchrowworldview.blogspot.com/
The chicken scandal in Monsey has brought to the forefront a number of
issues.  There is a potential inherent problem for any (meat)restaurant
,butcher etc, where the Rav Hamachshir and the Mashgiach (those
responsible for the daily supervision of kashruth) ,come in for
inspections once a week or once a month.In addition, if the mashgiach
does not have the sole key to the freezer/refrigerator,and is not
present at the moment of deliveries,to check the origin and status of
shipments,the problem is compounded.
In the human experience,there is no absolute prevention of fraud and
thievery.Nevertheless, the kashruth systems inaugurated by major
organizations,lead to a high standard ,that is computerized,with systems
of checks that seeks to remove the profit motive of an individual
Rabbi-supervisor /entrepreneur. The system of individual Rabbis, often
without specialized expertise in food technology(such as the complex
field of flavoring)giving out multiple certifications to local stores
large and small,should be a thing of the past.
The OU,has spent millions of dollars in recent years on technology and
computerization in kashruth. One should not assume, that wearing the
garb of the 'chassidic or Yeshiva world', is a guarantee for
honesty,morality or integrity, either between man and man ,or man and
G-d. Greed and a total lack of concern for a fellow Jew or human being
can allow individuals to rationalize their evil actions. As
consumers,and as those seeking a higher level of spirituality in our
everyday life we should follow the old axiom:Et caveat emptor" let the
buyer beware.In the case of kashruth,take nothing for granted.
 
K'Siva V'Chatsma Tova

 



I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20060913/bed08a05/attachment.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 145 bytes
Desc: Blank Bkgrd.gif
Url : http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20060913/bed08a05/attachment.gif

On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 15:13:14 -0400
R' "Moshe Yehuda Gluck" <mgluck@gmail.com>
Wrote: Subject: [Avodah] Phantom Chazal?

>"One who prohibits the permitted will end up permitting the prohibited."
>Any takers?

This isn't the exact quote that R"MYG is seeking but it appears on point.
See Avot 1:16 : Rabban Gamliel Omer... Ve-al tabeh le-asser umadot.

See the Baretenura etc.: Being machmir in the amount of maaser rather than 
measuring the amount correctly results in the unexpected consequence of  
having rendered one's peirot as permissible but   the maaser then becomes 
problematic as it then has a mixture of maaser and tevel (i.e. the excess 
that is neither tithed produce nor maaser). This follows appropriately after 
Rabban Gamliel first says "asei lecha rav ve-histalek min ha ha-safeik". The 
Barenura refers us  to "Ha-marbeh be maasrotav, peirotav metukanim 
u-maaserotav mekulalim" (Eruvin 50a)  (also cited by RSRH in his commentary 
on Avot).

The logical consequence of a chumra in one area of halacha may be a kula in 
a related area.

KT
Eliiyahu

Not to add fuel to the fire, but I offer the following question for the "chazal are infallible" crowd:

In daf yomi, Sukkah 8, we find approximations as to the area of a circle etc. which are at best imprecise.

I was particularly struck by the tosafot, especially on 8a s.v. kama, which brilliantly (via an example of filling an area with strings which are then cut and re-arranged) proved certain relationships between squares and circles.  However, the basic issue of area and spatial relationships are known to any high school freshman (if not earlier) based on rudimentary equations of pi, x-squared, and the Pythagorean theorem, which were obviously unknown to Rashi, Tosafot, and likely many views of the gemara as well (see e.g. 8b).

Should we lose our respect for the gemara, Rashi and tosafot because their understanding of geometry was so unsophisticated?  Or do we assume that "nishtaneh ha-tevah" and that the geometric relationships of circles and squares has changed?  Or rather (my view) that it is perfectly fine for chazal to have dealt with the level of knowledge at the time, and we need not hold them to account on areas outside the purview of torah? 

Putting the standard on chazal to be perfect in knowledge of all areas is more likely to bring chazal to disrepute.

SLK

In one of the circulars about the Monsey problem, signed by what I presume to be a broad swatch of the notable rabbanim in town, there was the phrase that "as to kashering pots and kapara, consult your local rabbi."

I'd like to raise the hashkafa aspect of this "kapparah" line for discussion among the assemblage.

I am puzzled why anyone would think "kapparah" is in order.  Clearly, oness rachmana patray, and unless someone who relied on the kosher supermarket knew of a problem or was negligent, this is clearly an oness.  Further, since chezkat kashrut is a halacha -- and here, I assume there was in addition to that, some kind of hashgacha which was deceived -- where is the blame necessary to require "kapparah"?  Is there a suggestion that anyone in the community, except those perpetuating the fraud, was at fault?

I understand that one ingesting non-kosher may need some kind of "tahara" on the principle that non-kosher is me-tamteim es halev, and that one properly feels violated for eating non-kosher, even b'oness.  But "kaparah"?

Finally, I understand that if the chamor of Pinchas ben Yair did not eat treif, tzaddikim atzma lo kol she-kain, so that someone who might otherwise have considered that adage applicable to themselves would conclude that indeed, their status as a tzaddik may not be as firm as they would have hoped.  Thus, if anything, I would think the mussar for the Monsey community is that we are not at the level of Pinchas ben Yair's chamor.  This is a cause for increased humility and probably teshuva, but again, not "kaparah."

Thoughts?



[Email #2. -mi]

When we had an episode of fraudulent kosher chickens in Chicago some years back (Shelat), Rav Gedalia Schwartz ruled the one did not need to replace china.  As I recall, it was based on a combination of factors of safek (if anyone bought the treif chickens rather than kosher ones from the save purveyor), hefsed, and aino ben yomo.  There may also have been an additional safek added as to whether the chickens when placed on the plate were yad soledet.  R. Schwartz did recommend kashering that which could be kashered.  I noted R. Weissmandl provides a "leniency" for china etc. (kashering 3 times), but does prohibit items which cannot be kashered (he also does not discuss lids where the knobs cannot be removed).

One question -- on kashering sinks, R. Weissmandel suggests kashering from the bottom up.  I understand tasayi gaver (if applicable at all) but as a practical matter, purportedly "treif" water (because it absorbed treif from the sink) would flow down from the top of the sink to the bottom, which has just been kashered.  Shouldn't the kashering be from the top down?



                Shalom L. Kohn


------------------------------


Avodah mailing list
Avodah@lists.aishdas.org
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 2, Issue 6
************************************

Send Avodah mailing list submissions to
	avodah@lists.aishdas.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
	avodah-owner@lists.aishdas.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Avodah digest..."