Avodah Mailing List

Volume 23: Number 81

Wed, 18 Apr 2007

• 1. R. Asher Weiss (Eli Turkel)
• 2. Re: R' Asher Weiss (torahmike@gmail.com)
• 3. peanuts (Eli Turkel)
• 4. Re: Mincha (Marty Bluke)
• 5. YHA she-chal be-BHB (Rabbi Daniel Yolkut)
• 6. Re: Behab and Yom Haatzmaut (Gilad Field)
• 7. Behab and Yom Haatzmaut (Shalom Berger)
• 8. Re: Peanuts and other Kitnios (Danny Schoemann)
• 9. Re: When do the malachim come (T613K@aol.com)
• 10. Re: Love of Israel (Chana Luntz)
• 11. Re: When do the malachim come (Moshe Yehuda Gluck)
• 12. Re: Peanuts and other Kitnios (Zev Sero)
• 13. Re: Miriam and Aharon (T613K@aol.com)

See SA OC 696:4 (talking about Mishloach Manos): "V'im ein lo, machlif im
chaveiro, zeh sholeich l'zeh seudaso v'zeh sholeiach l'zeh seudaso k'dei
l'kayem umishloach manos ish l'rei'eihu."
Not a complete parallel, but there is a similarity...>>

It would be parallel if SA was talking about "matanot le-evyonim"
However, mishloach manot is a halachah in either Simchah or in providing
for a Purim Seudah. If it is for simchah then exchanging presents is no problem.
Even if the reason is to provide a meal it is still different than tzedakah.
Does SA say that 2 poor people can exchange matanot le-evyonim?


-- 
Eli Turkel

  This reminds me of my favorite phrase in Shas - "Hafuchei Metrasa Lama
lei?",
i.e, "What is the point of switching things back and forth? [That would be
pointless!]" Maybe someone
can bar-ilan it and see if this is ever used regarding tzedaka in
shas/poskim?
                                                Mike Wiesenberg

On 4/15/07, saul mashbaum <smash52@netvision.net.il> wrote:
>
>
> Consider the following scenario: a poor person, let's call him
> Moishie gives his friend, Shloimie, also a poor person, $100 as tzedaka
> (even though Moishie owes many times that amount). Shloimie promply gives
> the $100 to Moishie as tzedaka. The friends continue to give the $100 to
one
> another, doing this dozens of times. Ultimately Moishie sees that Shloimie
> will not keep the $100, although he wants him to, and puts it in back his
> wallet. Now Moishie and Shloimie are each exactly as impoverished as
before,
> but each has the tremendous zchut of having given thousands of dollars to
> tzedaka!
>
> I doubt that this really "works" in the heavenly beit din,  but not being
> privy to the proceedings of this most Supreme Court of all, I can't really
> be sure.
>
> Saul Mashbaum
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070417/04abbb78/attachment.htm 

A generation has now grown up which never saw Pesachdik peanut oil,
nor reliable non-glatt meat. Which brings us to the question: Given
that even 50 years ago, there *were* some groups who had a genuine
minhag to avoid peanuts on Pesach, and also some groups who had a
genuine minhag to eat only glatt meat, if a captive audience ends up
following these practices only because of economic or availability
reasons, does that mean that this has become their minhag?
Personally, I doubt it. But go try to tell that to them!>>

Sounds like the machloket over 'lo rainu lo ra-ayah". The Ramah
paskens that women can't do schechita since that is the minhag. Others
argue on the grounds that we don't know why women didn't do schechita,
maybe it
was just that they weren't strong enough or disliked blood or were
just taking someone else's job. Why would that create a problem?

According to the Ramah a posek could come in anumber of years and say
he agrees with RMF but today the minhag is not to eat peanut oil

-- 
Eli Turkel

R' Galsaba asked
<What it the Halacha about davening Mincha after Plag Mincha, and then
Arvit before Tzeit <Kochavim specially on Fridays during daylight
saving time?

This called Tartei d'sasrei and is generally frowned upon by the
poskim. The Mishna Berura paskens that on erev shabbos you can be
mekil if it is difficult.

However, there is another lesser know issue with doing this.

There is a din that you are not allowed to start a meal 1/2 hour
before the time of krias shema which is tzeis hakochavim. tzeis
hakochavim is approximately a 1/2 hour after sunset (according to the
Gra), so you cannot start a meal after sunset. During the week most
people are mekil about this halacha and rely upon the fact that they
daven maariv with a set minyan every night (e.g. 8 or 9PM), however
Friday night this doesn't apply as you already davened maariv early.
Let's look at a concrete example.

Sunset is 7:55. Kabalas Shabbos and Maariv is at 7:00PM (the usual
time in NY and after plag). Davening takes 45 minutes, you stand
around and shmooze for 5 minutes after davening and it takes 5-10
minutes to walk home. By the time you get home it is 8:00 and you
aren't allowed to make kiddush and start the meal because it is within
a half of hour of the zman of krias shma. In other words you haven't
gained anything because al pi din, you have to wait until you say
krias shema (e.g. tzeis) until you can eat. The usual heter of minyan
kavua doesn't apply because you already davened maariv.

With regards to being mekabel shabbos, eating and then davening maariv
later, RHS mentioned in the name of the Rav (who I believe said it in
the name of the Gra) the following problem with that. He explained
that the 3 meals on Shabbos are each supposed to come after the
corresponding tefila. The meal at night after maariv, the morning meal
after shacharis and the third meal after mincha. I don't remember the
exact reason why the meals are connected to the tefillas.

Message: 12
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 11:52:13 +0300
From: "Marty Bluke" <marty.bluke@gmail.com>
Subject: [Avodah] Behab and Yom Haatzmaut
To: avodah@lists.aishdas.org
Message-ID:
    <d20f942b0704170152y67497423m8824105529f84ea5@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

This year the first day of Behab falls out next Monday which also
happens to be the fifth of Iyyar, Yom Haatzmaut. I am very curious as
to what people who usually observe both (e.g. say selichos on Behab
and say Hallel on Yom Haatzmaut) will do next Monday when the 2 clash.
Will you say both selichos and Hallel? Skip selichos?


The problem would seem to be averted, since YHA is being observed on 6 Iyyar
this year, b/c of concerns of chilul Shabbos with Yom haZikaron on Motz'Sh.
However, the practice in RZ circles seems to be to begin BHB after 5 Iyyar
in any case. See Shanah b'Shanah (the luach put out by the Rabbanut at
http://www.daat.ac.il/daat/toshba/dinim-7/8-2.htm )

I was told that in Merkaz haRav in the early days of the State, when BHB and
YHA would coincide, that both selichos and Hallel were recited, but I have
not seen this in writing.

Daniel Yolkut

If I recall correctly in the YU beis medrash they said slichos for behab AND
hallel (at least in R' Dovid's, ztz'l, minyan).

Gilad Field




> >>This year the first day of Behab falls out next Monday which also
> >>happens to be the fifth of Iyyar, Yom Haatzmaut. I am very curious as
> >>to what people who usually observe both (e.g. say selichos on Behab
> >>and say Hallel on Yom Haatzmaut) will do next Monday when the 2 clash.
> >>Will you say both selichos and Hallel? Skip selichos?
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070417/a726bd70/attachment-0001.html 

According to the present position of the Chief Rabbinate in Israel, when the 
5th of Iyyar falls on a Monday, Yom Haatzmaut is pushed off until Tuesday. 
See http://www.lookstein.org/resources/chief_rabbi.pdf .

Although this was instituted in order to avoid hillul Shabbat in preparation 
for Yom Hazikaron, it also keeps Yom Haatzmaut from ever falling out on 
Behab, since the 5th of Iyyar cannot come out on a Thursday (it matches the 
seventh day of Pesach, which, based on Lo Bed"u Pesach, cannot fall out on a 
Thursday).

Shalom

Rabbi Shalom Z. Berger, Ed.D.
The Lookstein Center for Jewish Education in the Diaspora
School of Education
Bar-Ilan University
http://www.lookstein.org
Blogging at http://schmoozed.lookstein.org/ 

I wrote:
> > Barley grows on a stalk - each kernel in it's own bran,
and R' Zev Sero replied:
> Barley isn't kitniyot, it's dagan.

Obviously, :-) but you surely agree that the gezerah/takono/minhag of
kitnios is somehow related to confusing them with dagan (chometz).

Since we're currently discussing "sharvit" I was trying to figure out
how barley & wheat get confused with beans, peanuts and tiny mustard.

> > Peanut pods grow underground in bean-like fashion
> But they're still pods, just like pea pods.  Hence the name "pea nuts".

Actually they look very different and there manner of growing is
totally dissimilar - so where do they get confused with beans and how
do both of them get confused with barley?

> > Mustard grows in flowers with seeds about 1 mm in diameter
> The seeds are inside pods.  I know because I once grew some.

But these must be tiny pods, as these pretty yellow mustard plants are
rather small.

> Zev, posting from Singapore.
- Danny posting from Jerusalem, all puzzled.

 
 
From: "Akiva Blum" _ydamyb@actcom.net.il_ (mailto:ydamyb@actcom.net.il) 



>> I know a number a people that daven mincha and kabolas shabos  with an 
early shabos minyan, go home for the seuda, and after finishing the  seuda...they 
return to shul to join the late- shabos maariv.... when is the best  time for 
singing shalom aleihem? When do the malachim come? After kabolas  shabos, or 
after maariv?
What should someone do if he decided to say kabolas  shabos at home?<<

Akiva





>>>>>
I can put this in a cynical sounding way, or in a chassidish sounding  way, 
but either way the answer would be the same:  a. cynical -- do you  /really/ 
think malachim come to your house every week -- and that it  matters to them 
when, or whether, you sing to them? Do  you really think  the malachim come home 
with the Abba from shul, and if he doesn't go to shul --  they don't come?    
b. chassidish -- the malachim come when they are  welcomed.
 
In either case, the answer is the same:  you sing Sholom Aleichem  when you 
want to.  
 
Until about 500 years ago, there was no such song as Sholom Aleichem, so  I 
don't think there is really a "must" time for singing it.   I've  heard of 
people not wanting to keep hungry guests waiting on a very late Friday,  and 
therefore singing Sholom Aleichem after the first course.     We never make Shabbos 
early except when invited out to the homes of others who  do, but if we did 
make Shabbos early, I would opt for singing before the  meal.  
 
Since the malachim look around to see if the home is Shabbosdik, they  must 
come right after kabalas Shabbos -- not after a late ma'ariv when  you've 
already put the food away, the table is no longer set, and the candles  have gone 
out!  Would you want them to look around then and say, "So may it  be every 
Shabbos"?!




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



************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070417/9194b830/attachment.htm 

> RMB writes:
> 
> > When a malekh tells you to violate an asei de'Oraisa,
> > wouldn't divrei haRav vedivrei hatalmid tell you to ignore 
> > the king? Or is that only where there the violation is of a lav?
> > 
> > Because if it includes a command to violate an asei...
> > Listening to the king would be expressing kavod, no? So if 
> > kavod hamelekh is grounds for violating issurim, then when 
> > would divrei haRav ever apply to a melekh?
> > 

And I then responded:
 
> I think that the only way to reconcile the sources is to say 
> that listening to a king is not in fact an aspect of the 
> halachic form of kavod.  Or at least, listening to him might 
> be, but following what he says if it violates halacha is not. 

I confess I wrote this too quickly, ie before checking the sources for
the various piskei Rambam.  While this is correct as far as it goes,
actually the real reason the Rambam says what he does is based on a
drasha of the pasuk in Yehoshua 1:18 found in the gemora (Sanhedrin
49a).  To back up a bit, the gemora in Sanhedrin 48b (note in the
context of Achav, yet again) discusses where the property of a person
executed by the king for rebelling against him goes, noting that it goes
to the king (that is how come Achav could legitimately get Navos'
vineyard if he could be found to have cursed the king).  Rashi there
brings the verse in Yehoshua 1:18 as the source for the right to execute
a person who rebels against a king, including a king of Israel (noting
of course that in the source pasuk we are talking about Yehoshua).  Then
on 49a, the gemora explains that the reason that Amasa legitimately did
not heed Dovid Hamelech's command to gather the men of Yehuda in three
days, but took longer, which otherwise would have been considered to
subject him to the death penalty for rebellion against the malchus (as
Yoav argued), was because they had started learning a masechta at the
time so he waited until they finished, because he learnt from "ach" and
"rak" in that pasuk that while one might think that the obligation to
obey a king was even l'divrei torah, "talmud lomar rak chazak v'ematz",
therefore he correctly was not mevatel their learning by gathering them
as quickly as Dovid Hamelech had commanded.

So, based on this, it would seem that your point that kavod for a melech
should lead you to be mevatel an assei is quite correct, except that
there is a specific drasha to rule it out.  And it is on the basis of
this, according to the Kesef Mishna (ie the drasha of ach v'rak), that
the Rambam poskened the way he did (ie that while one who does not obey
a king is subject to the death penalty, that is only if the reason he
disobeys the king is not because he is involved in a mitzvah, and that
the death penalty certainly does not apply if the king tells him to be
mevatel a mitzvah).

Note however that this is Yehoshua, ie Navi, being darshened in this
way, not Torah (and all the discussions identify kovod hamelech etc as a
Torah obligation), although maybe this is because it is the first part
of Yehoshua or alternatively because it is just explaining the
underlying obligation.

Regards

Chana

R'n TK:
I can put this in a cynical sounding way, or in a chassidish sounding way,
but either way the answer would be the same:? a. cynical -- do you /really/
think malachim come?to your house every week -- and that it matters to them
when, or whether, you sing to them? Do? you really think the malachim come
home with the Abba from shul, and if he doesn't go to shul -- they don't
come?? ? b. chassidish -- the malachim come when they are welcomed.
?
In either case, the answer is the same:? you sing Sholom Aleichem when you
want to.? 




As I understand it, the poskim take Malachim very seriously. An uncle of
mine once recounted a Machlokes between R' MF and RYBS (sorry, I have no
Mareh Mekomos) as to what direction one should turn for Bo'ee B'shalom when
the entrance of the Shul is not in back. IIRC, the Machlokes revolved upon
their respective understandings of how Malachim act - no cynicism or
Chassidism involved. 

KT,
MYG

Danny Schoemann wrote:
> I wrote:
>>> Barley grows on a stalk - each kernel in it's own bran,
> and R' Zev Sero replied:
>> Barley isn't kitniyot, it's dagan.
> 
> Obviously, :-) but you surely agree that the gezerah/takono/minhag of
> kitnios is somehow related to confusing them with dagan (chometz).
> 
> Since we're currently discussing "sharvit" I was trying to figure out
> how barley & wheat get confused with beans, peanuts and tiny mustard.

The original reason for gezerat kitniyot isn't really known, because
there are no records of who made the gezera, and when.  But the
generally given reason is that kitniyot such as peas, beans, and
lentils, are cooked in a pottage ("daysa" in Hebrew, "kashe" in
Yiddish), just like barley, so the fear was that an am haaretz would
see that kashe is permitted on Pesach, and would go home and cook
a barley kashe.  So they banned the entire species of kitniyot,
which is characterised by growing in a pod.

(Linguistic note: somehow, in the last generation or two, "kashe"
seems to have come to mean buckwheat.  But in Yiddish "kashe" is a
generic term for any cooked grain or kitniyot, and buckwheat is
called "shvartze kashe".)

(Second note: buckwheat is not a grain or a legume, so if it were
not known at the time of the gezera it's possible that it would not
be included.  But it was known then, and since it is in fact cooked
like a kashe it was included in the ban.  This *might* be a reason
to ban quinoa as well.)


>>> Peanut pods grow underground in bean-like fashion
>> But they're still pods, just like pea pods.  Hence the name "pea nuts".
> 
> Actually they look very different and there manner of growing is
> totally dissimilar - so where do they get confused with beans and how
> do both of them get confused with barley?

They wouldn't, but the gezera seems to have been on the entire
family of pod-growing seeds.


>>> Mustard grows in flowers with seeds about 1 mm in diameter
>> The seeds are inside pods.  I know because I once grew some.
> 
> But these must be tiny pods, as these pretty yellow mustard plants are
> rather small.

They are indeed small pods - as I recall they were about 2 cm long.
And mustard is not cooked as a pottage, so there would be no reason
to ban it on its own.  But when they banned all pod-growing seeds,
mustard was included.

-- 
Zev Sero               Something has gone seriously awry with this Court's
zev@sero.name          interpretation of the Constitution.
                       	                          - Clarence Thomas

[question from my husband --TK]
 
I was asked why only Miriam was punished for speaking lashon hara about  
Moshe.  The pasuk clearly states that Aharon did so as well.  Why  wasn't he also 
punished?  I know that there are opinions that he also was  stricken but the 
parsha does not spell that out.  Can you ask your areivim  pals if anyone knows?


--Michael Katz
_m613k@aol.com_ (mailto:m613k@aol.com) 
=============



************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070418/c265f836/attachment.html 

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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 23, Issue 81
**************************************

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..."