Avodah Mailing List

Volume 23: Number 7

Tue, 23 Jan 2007

• 1. Re: VeHaGita - Proof....sources and quotes (Daniel Israel)
• 2. Re: daily halachot (Ken Bloom)
• 3. Re: daily halachot (Ken Bloom)
• 4. tare (Harry Weiss)
• 5. Yosef (Ilana Sober)
• 6. Re: Moshe Rabeinu's stuttering (Arie Folger)
• 7. Re: if they asked, it would have been assur (Arie Folger)
• 8. Re: Moshe Rabeinu's stuttering (Zvi Lampel)
• 9. Re: tare (menucha)
• 10. Re: tare (Daniel Israel)
• 11. Ona'ah less than one sixth (celejar)
• 12. Navi and Physical Defects (dfinch847@aol.com)
• 13. Re: daily halachot (Micha Berger)
• 14. Re: Navi and Physical Defects (Daniel Eidensohn)
• 15. Re: zman hadloko erev Shabbos and motzoei Shabbos (Michael Kopinsky)
• 16. Re: ona'ah (was: daily halachot ) (Michael Kopinsky)

Someone wrote:
> : There is further discussion of this Igros Moshe YD IV #36.8 page 229 and 
> : #36.15 p233  He say that even one who learns regularly - but it is not 
> : his prime focus in life - is not called a ben Torah.

As I don't have easy access to Igros Moshe, could someone be so kind as 
to explain in what context he mentions this?  What is the halachic 
nafkeh minah in being a ben  Torah that he is concerned with?

-- 
Daniel M. Israel
dmi1@cornell.edu

R' Eli Turkel wrote:
> >>: Seems strange to me that paying any worker in advance is less  of
> >>: a mitzva then paying at the end because he is not legally required
> >>: to  pay in advance.

RMB wrote:
> >> Me too. More so, paying up front means that you have less  chance
> >> to forget to pay.

There's a lav and an aseh involved. You're either cha
yav to both or 
neither. There are ways to pay (such as paying early, or hiring through 
a third party) where you aren't chayav to either. You're also not 
chayav to either when you literally don't have the money to pay the day  
payment becomes due. In the later case, the aseh encourages you to 
avoid the situation where you don't have money to pay.

On Sunday 21 January 2007 12:15, T613K@aol.com wrote:
> This exchange made me think of a question.  Today (Sunday -- "Shabbos
>  Sheini shel galuyos" as the joke has it), someone put in a new timer
> for me and  I paid him right away -- with a check.  Not it occurs to
> me that he can't deposit the check until tomorrow, so is that
> considered payment?

If that's considered a usual way to pay him for that kind of work, then 
it's considered payment. If it's not considered a usual way to pay him 
for that kind of work, then it's only considered payment if the 
installer can hand the check to the next guy when he wants to pay for 
something and use that as payment (which is not the case in the US).

(All of this is based on my reading of "The Halachos of Other People's 
Money" By R' Yisroel Pinchos Bodner, available from Feldheim)

--Ken

-- 
Ken Bloom. PhD candidate. Linguistic Cognition Laboratory.
Department of Computer Science. Illinois Institute of Technology.
http://www.iit.edu/~kbloom1/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070121/adbaa51b/attachment-0001.pgp 

On Sunday 21 January 2007 18:08, Ken Bloom wrote:
> R' Eli Turkel wrote:
> > >>: Seems strange to me that paying any worker in advance is less 
> > >>: of a mitzva then paying at the end because he is not legally
> > >>: required to  pay in advance.
>
> RMB wrote:
> > >> Me too. More so, paying up front means that you have less 
> > >> chance to forget to pay.
>
> There's a lav and an aseh involved. You're either chayav to both or
> neither. There are ways to pay (such as paying early, or hiring
> through a third party) where you aren't chayav to either. You're also
> not chayav to either when you literally don't have the money to pay
> the day payment becomes due. In the later case, the aseh encourages
> you to avoid the situation where you don't have money to pay.

Immediately after I sent this, I realized what must be the reason why 
you're not chayav if you pay in advance. R' Bodner doesn't say it, but 
it must be that you're not chayav to pay for work until the work is 
actually done (because there's still the possibility of the work being 
cancelled or postponed to another day).

Let me just plug some English language books that focus on halachot that 
are very important, but that many feel are lacking given that much 
spontaneous halacha study focuses on Orach Chayim, and that there's a20
big push to study Chofetz Chayim but no big push to study the 
underlying issues that shemirat halashon stands on.

 * "Living Among Friends" by R' Dovid Castle (Feldheim)
   discusses halachot related to v'ahavta l'reyacha kamocha, ona'at
   devarim, sinah, and ganeivat da'at. More volumes are expected, and
   I look forward to reading them.

 * "The Laws of Interpersonal Relationships" by R' Avrhohom Ehrman
   (ArtScroll). This has a similar focus to "living among friends" but
   may be better organized and easier to follow. I haven't read this
   book.

 * "Halachos of Other People's Money" by R' Pinchas Bodner (Feldheim)

--Ken
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070121/a456adae/attachment-0001.pgp 

> From: "Eli Turkel" <eliturkel@gmail.com>
> I stepped into the bakery this morning and watched. The workers consistantly
> put the box (paper or plastic shell) on a digital scale and then hit the
> "tare" button to re-zero it. "
>
> I believe that 1/6 is only for undoing the sale but any conscious overcharge is
> prohibited.
> In Israel I have never seen digital scales with them being zeroed out after the
> package is put on. Obviously he would welcome such an innovation.
>

I am surprised that there is no law in Israel about it.  In California and 
most other states here that is covered by law.  Below in a except from a 
web site here.

Q: What is tare?
A: Tare, or tare weight, is the weight of a bag, soaker, ice, packaging, 
wrapping, box, bin, pallet, truck, or any material not considered product 
or part of the net weight. Tare weight plus net weight equals gross 
weight. Selling by gross weight or measure is a misdemeanor (Business & 
Professions Code 12023).



Harry J. Weiss
hjweiss@panix.com

Have noticed some media discussion (e.g.,
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070120.wxkidnap20/BNStory/specialScienceandHealth/home )
in the wake of the latest case of a child who was kidnapped and discovered
years later as a teenager - apparently having made no effort, despite
relative freedom, to contact his family or the police. The claim is that
this is not an unusual reaction among kidnap victims.

I am NOT ch"v trying to reduce the Torah or the Avot to psychology, but I
wonder if this could possibly shed light on the famous question of why
Yosef - who for years before becoming viceroy was very much a kidnap victim,
slave, and prisoner - never tried to contact Yaakov from Mitzrayim?

- Ilana

RZL wrote:
<<Rav SR Hirsch?s comments on Sh?mos 4:11 are instructive: "Indeed a
stammerer is the most fitting for this mission. Every word of the
stuttering stammerer is itself an os. If a man who ordinarily stammers
speaks easily and flowingly in G-d's mission, every word brings its own
credentials with it." Complementing this are Rav Hirsh's remarks (and
similar ones by others) on (3:12): "Your insufficiency is the guarantee
that you /are/ sent by G-d. Without it, the salvation in Egypt would fall
into the category of world-historical events which glorify human
greatness....">>

This actually stems from Derashot haRan, cited by the Abarbanel.

Regarding R'nTK's wondering at a report that Yemenite women pronounced
Hebrew somewhat differently from their male counterpart, I would like to
note that on a recent visit to Brooklyn, one woman told me "men say
choilom, while women say choulom". This Brooklyn phenomenon obviously
comes from the different educational philosophies of boys' and girls'
schools.

Kol tuv,
-- 
With kind regards,
Arie Folger
http://www.ariefolger.googlepages.com

Reb Moshe Yehuda Gluck wrote:
<<R' SZN posted (on Areivim) this link,
http://www.cjnews.com/viewarticle.asp?id=11008 and assumes, in his
caption, that it would be assur. Would it really be? The only thing stated
in this article is that the subject took female hormones. I highly doubt
that this comes under the letter of the letter of the law of Lo Silbash
(although, I agree that it would be included in the spirit). Also, mah
dino? Rambam (Hilchos Nashim 2) discusses the various simanim, if these
are all surgically or chemically induced does it halachically change one's
gender? And, Lu Y'tzu'yer that Surgeons manage to have a (?former?) man
give birth - do we say Banim harey hein k'simanim? Comments?>>

Believe it or not, but there are actually pre20th century meqorot dealing
with that. The matter is in dispute. Interestingly, the Tyity Eli-eyer,
who quotes the older material on the matter, concludes that gender change
is halakhicallz valid. Others disagree. Sources in a pdf provided upon
request. (I gave a shi'ur on this before last Purim)

Kol tuv,
-- 
With kind regards,
Arie Folger
http://www.ariefolger.googlepages.com

>------- Original Message -------
From : Arie Folger[mailto:afolger@aishdas.org]
>Sent : 1/22/2007 3:37:01 AM
>To : avodah@lists.aishdas.org
>Cc : hlampel@thejnet.com
>Subject : RE: Re: Moshe Rabeinu's stuttering
>
>RZL wrote:
<<Rav SR Hirsch?s comments on Sh?mos 4:11 are instructive: "Indeed a
stammerer is the most fitting for this mission. Every word of the
stuttering stammerer is itself an os. If a man who ordinarily stammers
speaks easily and flowingly in G-d's mission, every word brings its own
credentials with it." Complementing this are Rav Hirsh's remarks (and
similar ones by others) on (3:12): "Your insufficiency is the guarantee
that you /are/ sent by G-d. Without it, the salvation in Egypt would fall
into the category of world-historical events which glorify human
greatness....">>


This actually stems from Derashot haRan, cited by the Abarbanel.
Thanks for the reminder.

Regarding R'nTK's wondering at a report that Yemenite women pronounced
Hebrew somewhat differently from their male counterpart, I would like to
note that on a recent visit to Brooklyn, one woman told me "men say
choilom, while women say choulom". This Brooklyn phenomenon obviously
comes from the different educational philosophies of boys' and girls'
schools.

I also posted this idea, but it's not restricted to Brooklyn, although maybe even elsewhere it's due to its influence. Eveb here in Passaic, where the boys' and girls' schools are under the same hanhala, this distinction is still kept. Probably in keeping with "minhag avoiseinu" on one hand, and  "ahl tisoush touras immecha" on the other (;-).

Kol tuv,
-- 
With kind regards,
Arie Folger
http://www.ariefolger.googlepages.com 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070122/b32549dd/attachment.htm 

In one supermarket (davka not in the charedi sector) there was a sign in 
the baked goods department explaining that the weight of the package was 
factored into the pricing of the goods.  Isn't this an easier way around 
this problem?
menucha

>  
>

On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 07:47:17 -0700 menucha <menu@inter.net.il> 
wrote:
>In one supermarket (davka not in the charedi sector) there was a 
sign in 
>the baked goods department explaining that the weight of the 
package was 
>factored into the pricing of the goods.  Isn't this an easier way 
>around this problem?

I'm not sure what this means.  If they are selling something by the 
kilo, then the package weight is fixed while the weight of the 
goods changes depending on how much I buy.  So even if they 
discount the per kilo weight, if two people buy different amounts 
of baked goods but are given the same size box, then the one who 
buys less effectively pays more per kilo.

--
Daniel M. Israel
dmi1@cornell.edu

> I believe that 1/6 is only for undoing the sale but any conscious overcharge is
> prohibited.

The Shulhan Arukh (Siman 227) does indeed rule in accordance with the
Rosh that less than a sixth is a Safek Issur Torah.

Marty Bluke writes:

"How could the adon haneviim stutter? The Rambam (Mamrim 7:2) writes 
that a Navi has to be shalem b'gufu, if Moshe had a phsyical defect he 
should have been unable to become a Navi at all."

I had always read Rambam as saying that a navi needs moral and 
spiritual perfection. Did Rambam actually say that a navi cannot have a 
physical defect?

David Finch
dfinch847@aol.com


________________________________________________________________________
Check out the new AOL.  Most comprehensive set of free safety and 
security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from 
across the web, free AOL Mail and more.

On Sun, January 21, 2007 1:15 pm, T613K@aol.com wrote:
::: 4. Putting on a long lasting cosmetic treatment might violate  the
::: prohibition of tatooing.

:: ... according to Ashkenazim it would be assur as nir'eh kekesoves kaakah,
:: not the de'Oraisa itself....

: I don't remember the June discussion but this does sound strange to  me.  The
: whole advantage of "Shabbos lipstick" is that you put it on before  Shabbos
: and it lasts until Shabbos is over, or most of the day anyway...

That's not the scale were talking about. Think things that last as long as
Henna. IIRC we didn't establish exactly how many days or weeks would be the
cut-off, but it's not hours.

Tir'u baTov!
-mi

dfinch847@aol.com wrote:
> Marty Bluke writes:
>
> "How could the adon haneviim stutter? The Rambam (Mamrim 7:2) writes 
> that a Navi has to be shalem b'gufu, if Moshe had a phsyical defect he 
> should have been unable to become a Navi at all."
>
> I had always read Rambam as saying that a navi needs moral and 
> spiritual perfection. Did Rambam actually say that a navi cannot have a 
> physical defect?
>
>   

*Rashbam**[i]* <#_edn1>*(Shemos 4:10):* It is inconceivable that a 
prophet who spoke with G?d face to face and received the Torah from Him 
should have a speech impediment. Such an assertion is not found in the 
words of the Tanayim and Amoraim. We don?t concern ourselves with what 
is written in books outside the canon [The assertion is found in Shemos 
Rabbah 1:26 that Moshe stuttered].


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


???? ????? ???? ???? ???? ??? ????? ??????. ???? ??? ?? ????? ?????? 
?????????, ???? ???? ?????? ????????. (??? ?? ???? ????? ??? (?:??).

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070122/1c0ee4b7/attachment.html 

On 1/21/07, Zev Sero <zev@sero.name> wrote:

> ...The sun comes closest to rising at noon (which
> is a known number of minutes before or after 12:00, depending on the date
> but not ones location).

What? The amount before/after noon will certainly depend on longitude aka
position within the time zone.  The fluctuation will depend on latitude,
since I imagine that at the equator chatzos does not fluctuate, since
there is no summer/winter.

What do you mean then?  (Or correct me where I'm wrong.)

On 1/21/07, Elazar M. Teitz <remt@juno.com> wrote:
>      Bava Metzia 56b: "Kol davar sheb'mida v'sheb'mishkal
> v'sheb'minyan afilu pachos mik'dei ona'ah chozeir."

Just to clarify: this means that ona'ah is only when you got the amount
you asked for, but were mistaken/misled about the price.  Where you
actually got less merchandise than stipulated, it is a MEKACH TAUS and
either party can demand a chazarah.

It is difficult to say that in this case with the box it is a mekach taus
because even if the customer isn't paying attention, he can see that he is
paying for the box. Even ona'ah is difficult to invoke here since we
pasken like Rabbi Acha (60a&b) who is mattir b'davar hanir'eh/ davar
hanitam.  Here, it is clearly visible that you are paying for the box.

The question of whether Ona'ah Pachos miShtus is an issur is unclear to
me.  It is clear that the only reason it's not chozer is because of
mechila, and in cases where there won't be Mechila for 1/6 (such as by
changing money - see the Gemara on 52b and the Rosh who paskens like
Abbaye that the shiur for mechila is subjective) there is Ona'ah.  The
question is, when he is mochel the mamonus, does that absolve you of your
issur, or not?

(The halacha on 40b of "Hamistaker, al yistaker yoser mishtus" does not
seem to be relevant here.  That is talking about a) only things which are
chaye nefesh (Rashi), and b) is talking about adding 1/6 to the wholesale
price.  It is not a din in merchant/customer relations, which depend on
market values.)


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 23, Issue 7
*************************************

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..."