Avodah Mailing List

Volume 23: Number 121

Tue, 22 May 2007

• 1. Re: shemitta (Samuel Groner)
• 2. Ascending Har Habayit (Yisrael Medad)
• 3. Re: Wording of Kaddish (Micha Berger)
• 4. Re: Rashi and geography (Zev Sero)
• 5. Re: kashrus of milk (Zev Sero)
• 6. Re: Wording of Kaddish (Zev Sero)
• 7. Kosher Milk (Meir Rabi)
• 8. Re: kashrus of milk (Micha Berger)
• 9. Fw: [Areivim] kashrus of milk (SBA)
• 10. Re: Wording of Kadish (Doron Beckerman)
• 11. Re: shemitta (Mike Miller)
• 12. Re: Kosher Milk (Zev Sero)
• 13. Piyut Bar Yochai (was: Re: shelo osani) (Shoshana L. Boublil)
• 14. Re: Rashi and geography (Shoshana L. Boublil)
• 15. Ascending the Har Habayit (Yisrael Medad)

I wouldn't know where to begin arguing with someone who believes that
"someone who is not very very confident that his mitsvos outweigh his
averiros should definitely avoid being in EY."  My view is that even
if we cannot all live in Israel for practical reasons, it is certainly
the ideal that we all strive to live in Israel if possible.
Admittedly, as RAYW notes, I have not tried to rebut any of RAYW's
proofs.  I wonder though whether any posek actually rules in line with
RAYW's way of thinking, in advising people not to move to Israel if
they have more aveiros than mitzvos and in advising people to try to
avoid buying Israeli produce.  Poskim I'm aware of would differ with
RAYW on both counts.

Sammy Groner

A possible superimposition of the Temple courtyards over the current Temple
Mount:
http://myrightword.blogspot.com/2007/05/possible-location-of-temple.html

-- 
Yisrael Medad
Shiloh
Mobile Post Efraim 44830
Israel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070522/9536ef4b/attachment.htm 

On Mon, May 21, 2007 2:51 pm, ramiller500@aol.com wrote:
: 1.  In the Kaddish, when, where, and by whom was the earliest known
: use of these word forms? (pardon my layman's orthography)---
: a.  Yisgadeil
: b.  V'Yiskadeish
: c.  Tiskabeil
: d.  Any others heard in some shul(s), where a tzeire has (seemingly at
: least!) replaced a patach

As far as I know, c and d are errors caused by (a). IOW, someone is
about to give some reason I never heard for them.

(a) and (b) were discussed in volumes 4 and 6.

The Gra writes that since the opening two words parallel a nevu'ah
from Yechezeqeil, "Hisgadalti veHisqadashti", they should be said in
Hebrew. Even though Qaddish is written in Aramaic. Only problem is,
"Yisgadal veYisqadash" is valid Hebrew AND Aramaic.

The MB writes based on this Gra that it should be "Yisgadeil
veYisqadeish" which is valid Hebrew but not Aramaic. (Which ties in to
the zeicher/zecher thread, another case where the MB makes a new idea
based on something the Gra said but didn't do.)

But, as RDBannett pointed out, "Yisgadal" would also fulfill the Gra's
observation -- or do you lein parashas VaEschanein? (RDBannet's
comment was made on <mesorah@aishdas.org>, a list aimed at discussion
of nusa

The Gra's comment is difficult to understand. The only alternative I
could think of other than the MB's is that the Gaon was speaking in
terms of kavanah.

Tir'u baTov!
-mi

-- 
Micha Berger             Spirituality is like a bird: if you tighten
micha@aishdas.org        your grip on it, it chokes; slacken your grip,
http://www.aishdas.org   and it flies away.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            - Rav Yisrael Salanter

Shalom Berger wrote:
> I was learning Massechet Sukkah with my son and we came across the sugya 
> of "etrog ha-kushi" (31a), which concludes that whether or not a black 
> etrog is kosher depends on where you are - "ha lan ve-ha lehu."
>  
> Rashi's explaination follows the usual definition of those terms, and he 
> explains that since Bavel is closer to Kush than is Eretz Yisrael, 
> people in Bavel are used to them, and black is acceptable. Since Israel 
> is far from Kush, black is abnormal and therefore pasul.
>  
> Working with the assumption that Kush is Ethiopia, it appears that Rashi 
> has it backwards. Any suggestions?

1. We already know that Rashi's knowledge of geography wasn't much.

2. But in this case he might have a point.  Kush can mean a place in
central Asia, perhaps the Hindu Kush; cf the opinion that Hodu and Kush
are close to each other, and also the opinion that the Gichon, which
surrounds the Land of Kush, is the Ganges.  (Of course, Rashi says the
Pishon is the Nile, which is nowhere near the Tigris and Euphrates.
I wonder whether he knew that.)

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

Elliott Shevin wrote:
> I've been called on the cynicism of my post, and must apologize for 
> shooting from the hip. My reaction stems from the fact that AFAIK, cows 
> here in the U.S. used for cholov Yisrael and other milk are one and the 
> same.

They are not.

> The original post raises several questions for me.
> Does the pronouncement apply only to Israel, or is it global?

On the contrary, EY would be the last place I'd expect it to apply.
Isn't almost all milk in EY CY?  Or is it all milked by Thais now,
with no supervision?  And in other places there isn't enough CY
production to justify separate herds.  So it's only in the USA that
one can speak of a difference between CY and non-CY WRT treifot.


> Are the veterinary practices referred to occur in EY only, or are they 
> common worldwide?

It is common in the USA.  The big fuss about it 13 years ago was davka
in the USA. I don't know whether it's used at all anywhere else, or how
often.

 
> Is the pronouncement alleging that the practices it refers to render a 
> cow insufficiently viable to be kosher?

I'm sorry, I don't understand this question.

 
> The right set of answers might mean there's no cholov Yisrael (even de 
> jure) outside EY.

Huh?

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

Micha Berger wrote:
> On Mon, May 21, 2007 2:51 pm, ramiller500@aol.com wrote:
> : 1.  In the Kaddish, when, where, and by whom was the earliest known
> : use of these word forms? (pardon my layman's orthography)---
> : a.  Yisgadeil
> : b.  V'Yiskadeish
> : c.  Tiskabeil
> : d.  Any others heard in some shul(s), where a tzeire has (seemingly at
> : least!) replaced a patach
> 
> As far as I know, c and d are errors caused by (a). IOW, someone is
> about to give some reason I never heard for them.

The AR's siddur has "yisgadal veyiskadash", but "tiskabeil".  So they
don't seem to be related.

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

Is there not a more serious problem with CYisroel since it is being produced
at the behest of a Jew. We must consider Eyn MeVatLin Issur LeChatChiLa and
the consequent penalty that prohibits the food even though the non-K is in
proportions that would be Bottel had the AKUM put it in without the
instructions of the Jew.

On Tue, May 22, 2007 at 01:31:37PM +1000, SBA wrote:
:: Actually, AFAIK the Cholov Yisroel farms check out the cows to
:: ensure that they are not treif.

: I do not believe this is true. My understanding is that we rely on
: rov. (Qasheh levareir, as argued on Avodah.)
...
: From KCA an Oz Kosher consumer list:
...
: One of the conditions which require surgical procedure on a cow is something
: called a "displaced abomasum" or DA for short...

IOW, we do not check our cows to weed out tereifos. Rather, we avoid
using cows that had one particular kind of surgery which would cause it
to be a tereifah.

All the other possible tereifos are still in the herd.

I wonder if RSM (BCC-ed) could tell us what percentage of slaughtered
cows turn out to be tereifos without the surgery.

But my point -- that screening for tereifos would make milk unaffordable,
stands. We simply eliminate one common cause which is qal levareir.

In <http://www.wisc.edu/dysci/uwex/nutritn/pubs/tristateda01.pd>,
"Prevention of Displaced Abomasum", the literature estimates that LDA
(left DA) is 90% of all incidences, and occurse in somewhere between 1.4%
- 5.8% of all herds. Usually in calves, and usually ones that were fed
improperly when being weened, or had other health issues (hypocalacemia,
ie low calcium), ketosis, or bad Body Condition Score. Of those, 10%
are allowed to die.

I therefore to not know how many of the up to 5.8% are actually then
milked.

Tir'u baTov!
-mi

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 49th day, which is
micha@aishdas.org        7 weeks in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Malchus sheb'Malchus: What is the ultimate
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            goal of perfect unity?

From: "Micha Berger" <>
 RSBA wrote:
: Actually, AFAIK the Cholov Yisroel farms check out the cows to
: ensure that they are not treif.
===
I do not believe this is true. My understanding is that we rely on
rov. (Qasheh levareir, as argued on Avodah.)
I also do not believe we would be able to afford the resulting milk,
if we had to be that careful of our herds.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

From KCA an Oz Kosher consumer list:

The Status of milk In Australia & NZ

In general there is an issue associated with the milking of cows - and that
is the concern that the cow may be "treif" ie it may have an injury that
renders it not kosher and subsequently its milk is not kosher. When milking
individual cows one could normally employ the rule that "anything that
separates, separates from the majority " and as such the cow before you can
be assumed to be from the majority of kosher cows. This would be the case if
I took that individual pail of milk home.

Today however all the milk is mixed together at the dairies, and we are not
just dealing with maybes but certainties as we will see - and as such we
need there to be sixty times as many "kosher cows" as potentially "treif"
cows.

One of the conditions which require surgical procedure on a cow is something
called a "displaced abomasum" or DA for short. This occurs when there is a
build up of gas that forces the abomasum ( one of the cow's stomachs) to be
pushed out of position which causes great discomfort to the cow and is
potentially life threatening. In order to correct this an incision is made
through the stomach wall and the abomasum is pulled back into position and
sewed in place. According to most opinions this surgery renders the animal a
"treifah" as it perforates the stomach. (There is a minority view that
medical surgery does not cause treifot. I seem to remember indeed something
from Rav Shechter on this but I may be wrong). As such were an animal to
have had a DA then according to most opinions its milk would be not kosher.

In many countries where feed lots are used rather than natural grass, DA is
a very common occurrence. If in a particular herd to be milked there would
be more than one cow per sixty this would involve serious shaalot. This is
quite a common occurrence overseas and as such the issue raised at the
European conference and another reason to drink CY (where the herds are
usually checked).

In Australia and NZ however this problem is very rare. In NZ - with its
wonderful lush green grass (best place in the world to be a cow)- the
problem is non-existent. In Australia , due to the drought and the
introduction of feed lots, it is beginning to appear - but IMHO not in
amounts that pose as yet a problem.

As a matter of course , when the KA makes Cholov Yisroel milk we ensure that
both DA's and Caeser's (another surgery rendering the cow treif)are not in
the herd.

Moshe D Gutnick
Rabbi 

Is there even a Shoresh gimel-dalet-lamed in Aramaic? Doesn't the word
translate into Aramaic as Shoresh Reish-Beis-Alef?

If so, it seems Pashut that it is in Hebrew, no?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070521/37546842/attachment.html 

On 5/22/07, Samuel Groner <samgroner@gmail.com> wrote:
> I wouldn't know where to begin arguing with someone who believes that
> "someone who is not very very confident that his mitsvos outweigh his
> averiros should definitely avoid being in EY."  My view is that even
> if we cannot all live in Israel for practical reasons, it is certainly
> the ideal that we all strive to live in Israel if possible.

While I can't say I agree with most of RAYW's comments, it should be
noted that he is currently living in E"Y.

Furthermore, there may be no contradiction in "striving to live in
Israel" and "someone who is not very very confident that his mitsvos
outweigh his averiros should definitely avoid being in EY." Regardless
of whether one is hesitant due to purely spiritual concerns about the
land being more stringent on aveiros, or a combination
spiritual/tangible concern about issues such as chinuch for one's
children (especially teenagers), there are many valid reasons why
Aliyah L'Aretz (whether or not that includes Aliyah L'Medinah) may be
an ideal, but delayed or postponed.

-- Mike Miller
Ramat Bet Shemesh

Meir Rabi wrote:
> Is there not a more serious problem with CYisroel since it is being produced
> at the behest of a Jew. We must consider Eyn MeVatLin Issur LeChatChiLa and
> the consequent penalty that prohibits the food even though the non-K is in
> proportions that would be Bottel had the AKUM put it in without the
> instructions of the Jew.

How can the bittul issur be deliberate, when we don't even know whether
there *is* an issur, and we certainly don't know it about any individual
cow?

When we milk each cow, it's more likely than not that this cow is kosher,
so you'll surely agree that in milking it into the vat we're not being
mevatel issur lechatchila.   How can we be, when we don't know that the
cow is assur?  If so, at what point do you say we *are* being mevatel
issur lechatchila?  At what point are we knowingly pouring treif milk
into the kosher vat?  Surely at no point.  And even after we're done,
it's entirely possible that the entire herd was kosher, and there isn't
any issur at all.  The only thing that tells us that's unlikely is the
experience of shochtim.  But it's still merely unlikely, not impossible.
I don't think that's enough to call what we're doing "lechatchila".


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

> Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 06:30:42 +0300
> From: "Simon Montagu" <simon.montagu@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Avodah] shelo osani
> Message-ID:
> <580f9f600705202030p6560049fu4cf65b87d33e1821@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

> 'Bar Yohhai, Yud hhochma keduma
> Hishkafta lichvodo penima
> La"v netivot, reshit hateruma
> At keruv mimshahh ziv orecha'
>
> I've sometimes seen the third line of that verse printed as 'Sheloshim
> ushtaim netivot', but it's almost impossible to sing it that way, at least
> to the melody we use at home. I tell my children: to sing that line, all 
> you
> need is 'La"v'.

This Piyut was written by R' Lavi of Tripoli, Libya [notice the acronym].

Indeed, there is a lesser known melody, from Libya, that has a slightly 
different cadence,
and all the words and emphasise in the piyut work out correctly.

I'm hoping to get a recording of it one day from my husband and his family, 
and I'll post a link when I put it on the net.


Shoshana L. Boublil

> Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 23:12:19 +0300
> From: "Shalom Berger" <lookjed@mail.biu.ac.il>
> Subject: [Avodah] Rashi and geography
> To: <avodah@lists.aishdas.org>
> Message-ID: <018101c79be4$5ec0c950$917ba8c0@lookstei8a48c4>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1255"
>
> I was learning Massechet Sukkah with my son and we came across the sugya 
> of "etrog ha-kushi" (31a), which concludes that whether or not a black 
> etrog is kosher depends on where you are - "ha lan ve-ha lehu."
>
> Rashi's explaination follows the usual definition of those terms, and he 
> explains that since Bavel is closer to Kush than is Eretz Yisrael, people 
> in Bavel are used to them, and black is acceptable. Since Israel is far 
> from Kush, black is abnormal and therefore pasul.
>
> Working with the assumption that Kush is Ethiopia, it appears that Rashi 
> has it backwards. Any suggestions?

In midrashim concerning Alexander Mokedone [Macedonian] we find the term 
"kush" used as well.

There is no historical or geographical doubt that in the case of Alexander, 
"Kush" refers to India, as that is where he went.

He did not travel at any time to Ethiopia.

So, it is quite possible that there was more than one tradition of the 
location/usage of "Kush", and in this case Rashi is actually referring to 
India.

I don't know sufficient about the agriculture of India to know if they grow 
such etrogim.  Perhaps someone could find out. The question would then be if 
we are talking about Etrogim from the land of Kush (which is also called 
"Etrog Kushi") or are they actually black.


Shoshana L. Boublil

1.
*I once went up and was joined by Tuvia Sagiv. He is the proponent of
the main opinion opposing the Radba"z. He is of the opinion that the
mikdash was much further south than the location of the Dome of the Rock
platform. In deference to him, *
**
I really don't think one practice deferance to Tuvia.  While his
presentations are impressive, it flies in the face of all our knowledge as
well as the physical layout of the Mount.

2.
*Could you explain your parenthetical comment?*

 Both of those Rabbis belong to and are under the supervision of Rav Ovadia
Yosef who is vociferously opposed to any Temple Mount activity and was most
antagonistic to Rav Goren's approach in a personal sense even beyond the
dispute of Halacha.
Since the two Rabbis have forwards in the book, Rav Koren has done a
magnificent job in
skirting the issue but leaving one with the impression that indeed there is
room for entrance.

For example, see:
http://myrightword.blogspot.com/2007/05/possible-location-of-temple.html
-- 
Yisrael Medad
Shiloh
Mobile Post Efraim 44830
Israel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070522/fd20854c/attachment.htm 

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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 23, Issue 121
***************************************

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..."