Avodah Mailing List

Volume 25: Number 385

Wed, 12 Nov 2008

• 1. profit margins (herb basser)
• 2. Re: profit margins (Zev Sero)
• 3. Re: profit margins (Mike Miller)
• 4. a troubling halacha (Eli Turkel)
• 5. The Danger of Being Too Isolated (Yitzchok Levine)
• 6. Re: a troubling halacha (Zev Sero)
• 7. Shim'on veLevi achim... (Saul Mashbaum)
• 8. A troubling halacha (Saul Mashbaum)
• 9. Re: a troubling halacha (kennethgmil...@juno.com)

[I'm forwarding three Areivim posts in hopes to start a discussion
(again) on the topic of proper pricing in halakhah and onaas mamon.
-mi]

A few observations, 

Actually-- profit margins could be halachicly 1000% (beis din does not
set prices today) if all merchants set that price and onaah occurs (not
too rationally) for the aruch hashulchan both at 1/5 over the going rate
(if he charged you exactly that) and again-- yes again (A.HS claims in
the interest of fairness to minimize the effect of a double rate-- but
still keeping the halacha like shmuel!)-- at 1/6 over the same going rate
(if you were charged that), in between the two points is bitul mekah (if
you were charged that)-- get your money back, before the 1/6 rate you are
moichal the overcharge. On the dot of 1/6, 1/5 you get a refund of the
onaah. Over the 1/5 rate is again bitul mekah. Contemporary pesak sets
only one rate at 16%-- its true that the gemoro in hazahav says people
expect to pay more for clothes than for food but contemporary pesak
applies to everything that has a going price (excluding dollar/cut rate
stores etc). The plia is that at one point the deal is canceled and at
a higher point than that the deal is not canceled. I Think contemporary
pesak is to refund the onaah up to 16% and after that to get a full
refund. This is not kedin gemoro-- and you only get an hour or less to
complain so can you show it to mavin uncle shloimy who will tell you if
you were ripped off.-- But these rules are not based on profit margins--
but on going market rates. Crocs are 50 dollars, knockoffs 10 dollars. I
would guess they cost nearly the same to produce.

Zvi

herb basser wrote:

> Actually-- profit margins could be halachicly 1000% (beis din does not 
> set prices today) if all merchants set that price and onaah occurs [...]
> in between the two points is  bitul mekah (if you were charged that)--
> get your money back, before the 1/6 rate you are moichal the overcharge.

I don't think the source quoted in the article was talking about ono'oh,
which is a matter of consumer fraud and applies to all items, but about
the caps on profits from food (20%) and food-related items (100%).


-- 
Zev Sero               Something has gone seriously awry with this Court's
z...@sero.name          interpretation of the Constitution.
                                                  - Clarence Thomas
_______________________________________________
Areivim mailing list
Arei...@lists.aishdas.org
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/areivim-aishdas.org

[Is "brand name" an exemption from ona'ah? -micha]

On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 7:41 PM, herb basser <bass...@queensu.ca> wrote:
> Crocs are 50 dollars, knockoffs 10 dollars. I
> would guess they cost nearly the same to produce.

Possibly true, but it's worth noting that many brand names prices are
set (at least for the first few years) to recoup their development
costs. I doubt that difference in the case of rubber shoes is all that
great, but things like drugs certainly carry a large development /
certification cost (not to mention the profit required to offset the
many unsuccessful R&D attempts.

-- Mike Miller
Ramat Bet Shemesh

I am still waiting for a source (before KSA) that one shouldn't inform
relatives of the death of a family member (except for kaddish)

Simply not telling bad news should not override the mitzvah of vehavta
le-reacha kamocha where you know you are distressing the person
by withholding the information


-- 
Eli Turkel

The following is from the new translation of RSRH's commentary on the 
Chumash. YL

Bereishis 20:1  Avraham journeyed forth from there to the south 
country and settled between Kadesh and Shur, and he sojourned in Gerar.

Avraham settled (i.e., took up permanent residence) between Kadesh
and Shur, but he also sojourned (i.e., took up temporary residence) in
Gerar. What were the reasons for these two contrasting actions?

We have seen that, initially, Avraham sought to isolate himself and
his household from the atmosphere and society of the cities. For this
reason he first settled in the desolate south, and only gradually established
ties with the cities, finally settling among his allies, Aner, Eshkol,
and Mamre, who related to him with respect and esteem.

Now we see him, in his waning years, returning to the south. He
settles between Kadesh and Shur, in an isolated, uninhabited area near
the wilderness of Shur, which is known as a complete wasteland. At the
same time, however, he seeks contact with city life and occasionally
stays in Gerar, the capital of the Philistine kings.

Unless we are totally mistaken, we would venture to say that what
prompted Avraham and Sarah to change their place of residence was
the expectation of the imminent birth of their son. A Yitzchak should
be educated in isolation, far removed from any negative influence.

On the other hand, complete isolation, which denies the student all
contact with people who think differently and whose aims and way of
life differ from his own, is a dangerous educational mistake. A young
person who has never seen a way of life other than that of his parents,
never had an opportunity to compare his parents' lifestyle with that of
others, and never learned to appreciate the moral contrast between the
two, will never learn to value, respect and hold fast to the ways his
parents have taught him. He will surely fall victim to outside influences
at his first encounter with them, just as one who fears the fresh air and
closets himself in his room can be sure of catching cold as soon as he
goes outdoors.

Avraham's son, the future bearer of Avraham's heritage, should, from
time to time, enter the world that is alien to the spirit of Avraham.
There he can evaluate opposing ideas and strengthen himself to keep
to the ways of Avraham in a world that is opposed to them. For this
purpose Avraham chooses the capital of a Philistine prince.

In the land of the Philistines the degeneracy had apparently not spread
to the extent that it had reached in Canaan; hence the Philistines were not
subject to the destruction decreed upon their Emorite neighbors. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20081112/d1958ebd/attachment-0001.htm>

Eli Turkel wrote:
> I am still waiting for a source (before KSA) that one shouldn't inform
> relatives of the death of a family member (except for kaddish)
> 
> Simply not telling bad news should not override the mitzvah of vehavta
> le-reacha kamocha where you know you are distressing the person
> by withholding the information

On the contrary, if you know you are distressing the person then I
don't believe the KSA would have you withhold the information either.
The whole point is *not* to distress the person, and is a *fulfilment*
of veahavta; if in a particular case veahavta requires the opposite of
what it usually does, then so be it.

The same applies to kibbud av va'em -- sometimes it *requires* behaving
to parents in a way that it would usually forbid, e.g. shouting at a
parent to make them take their medicine or get up and take necessary
exercise.  The rule that one must normally not behave so is a general
rule, geared to the general situation.


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

RMB
>>>

 I just realized something else (aside from Yaaqov's berakhah quoted in
the subject line) that connects Levi to Shim'on.

Levi has no cheileq venachalah.

Shim'on failed to conquer their nachalah ....

>>

R. Menachem Leibtag in his shiur on VZot Habracha explains that the key to
the order of b'rachot in that parsha is *geographical*. Moshe Rabbenu,
standing on the border of EY and looking in, sees the country as divided
among the shvatim, and blesses them and their nachala, from Yehuda in the
south, working north , concluding with the northern tribes of  Dan, Naftali,
and Asher. (RML explains clearly how Reuven and Levi fit into this
framework)
 This accounts for Shimon's puzzling omisssion from Moshe's brachot; this
shevet had not nachala of its own, but was included in the nachala of
Yehuda.
RSRH in his commentary to the Torah alludes very briefly to this concept.

The entire shiur, most highly recommended, is at
http://www.tanach.org/vzot.htm
Saul Mashbaum
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20081113/f4f41899/attachment-0001.htm>

RJKaplan wrote:
>>
Indeed, I recall hearing (it may be an urban legend but I have heard it a
number of times from different people) that RYBS said kaddish for his wife
for a number of years following her death and when asked why he said "it's
the least I can do."
>>
This is testified to by someone who knew RYBS well in the biographical  film
about RYBS "The Lonely Man of Faith"

Saul Mashbaum
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20081113/b230455b/attachment-0001.htm>

I asked:
> If it is sufficient that the niftar has one person
> saying kaddish, then one son will suffice. ... And if
> you hold that they both would say it, because more
> saying of kaddish means more zechus for the niftar, then
> why are you surprised that someone would want to say
> kaddish "for a sister or a brother, if they leave behind
> sons who are over Bar Mitzvah who are saying kaddish for
> them?"

R' Yitzchok Levine responded:
> WADR, may I strongly suggest that you get a hold of a
> copy of Mourning in Halacha by Rabbi Chaim Binyamin
> Goldberg. ( http://www.artscroll.com/Books/moup.html )
> There you will be able to read all about Kaddish, who
> should say it, when it is to be said, etc. 

I already do have that sefer. Furthermore, I did look in it prior to
writing my post. I found nothing in it which would suggest that there is
anything wrong with people other than the sons saying kaddish. In fact,
halachos 39:11 and 39:23-28 specifically talk about people other than the
son who say Kaddish.

For example, halacha 39:20 there says, "The main benefit of Kaddish for the
deceased is derived when his or her own son recites it." The footnote on
that begins, "That the son - rather than other relatives - is the primary
one who should say Kaddish for the deceased, may be inferred from the story
of R' Akiva... if this were not so, R' Akiva would not have had to seek out
the son; he could simply have paid someone else to recite Kaddish."

Or, as R' Joel Rich posted, R' Akiva could have said the kaddish himself.
But he did not. Clearly, the deceased does get more benefit from his son's
saying kaddish, than if other people would say it. Even more than a kaddish
said by deceased's brother, father, or husband. 

But just because we see that the son's kaddish is the most important, that
does not mean that kaddish from other relatives is worthless or wrong.
*That's* the question I'm trying to resolve. I'll again repeat the question
which you can find in the first paragraph of this post: "Why are you
surprised that someone would want to say kaddish for a sister or a
brother?"

No one has suggested that if the son is saying kaddish, there might be
something wrong if someone else says it too. In fact, I already noted (in
the post I quoted above) that even when one son is saying Kaddish for a
parent, ALL poskim allow and REQUIRE the son's brothers to say kaddish
also. No one has objected to the additional zechusim which accrue to the
niftar when a second son says kaddish, and I have been curious why there
might be an objection to these additional zechusim when the kaddish was
said by a father, brother, or husband.

In a previous post, I quoted what someone wrote me offlist:
> It does, however, seem to be a common error.  At burials,
> I have often had to inform brothers of the niftar, or the
> husband of a nifteres, that they should not say the k'vura
> kaddish, though in the case of the husband, I'm not
> insistent, for obvious emotional reasons.

I asked this rav what his reasons were. Why is it that they *shouldn't* say it? What are they doing wrong?

He began his answer with a review of the history of the mourner's kaddish.
Originally, these kaddishim were said by the shliach tzibur, as many are
today. And when the deceased's son would lead the davening, he'd of course
say them all. But this could not be done if the son was below bar-mitzvah.
So the last kaddish of the davening - after Aleinu - was said by such a
son. When other tefilos were added (like Shir Shel Yom and such) an orphan
would say kaddish after those too.

What many of us forget too easily is that the person saying this kaddish is
actually filling a shliach-tzubur-rype role here. As such, it makes no
sense for more than one person to say it at a time. In actual fact, if
several orphaned brothers were in shul together, the same way that only one
of them could say Chazaras HaShatz, so too only one of them could say the
Kaddish after Aleinu. And another would say the Kaddish after Shir Shel
Yom. If it was Elul or Tishrei, a third son could say Kaddish after
L'David.

Depending on how many mourners were present, and how many kaddishes were
available, there might or might not be enough kaddishes to go around. This
unfortunately led to much machlokes. Eventually, most communities allowed
all the mourners to say kaddish together, but I cannot adequately stress
how reluctant the poskim were to allow this.

I suspect that I have finally reached the answer. When you hear someone
say, "A brother does not say kaddish unless the deceased left no sons", it
is a mistake to focus on the "brother" part of the statement. Because
according to the was this halacha was originally practiced, even a SON does
not say kaddish, unless he is the only one in shul saying it. If another
son is saying kaddish, then this son just listens with everyone else.

But many of us (and I am definitely one of the "us" here) grew up in
communities where many mourners recited the kaddish together. To us, when
we think of the Mourner's Kaddish, we think about the cathartic effect to
the mourner, and the zechus effect to the niftar, which occurs when the
tzbur responds Yehay Shmeh Rabbah. And this is okay, but too often we
forget that this should be done by one particular invididual acting as
Shaliach Tzibur, and not by group of mourners.

In summary, I don't think anyone really thinks that it is forbidden to say
kaddish for a brother. But if one does do so, and says that kaddish
together with others, then it is possible to say that this person is taking
advantage of a hetter which was not intended for his situation. The poskim
very reluctantly allowed several sons to say kaddish together, in order to
avoid the fights over the limited number of kaddishim available. Once we
became accustomed to that, so accustomed that it seems natural to us, then
the next step was to say kaddish not only for our parents, but other
relatives as well. Not forbidden, but not totally right either.

Or at least, that's how I understand it at this point.

Akiva Miller
_____________________________________________________________
Become a medical transcriptionist at home, at your own pace.
http://thirdpartyoffers.ju
no.com/TGL2121/fc/Ioyw6i3nFN8gq18HTXvFj3265nMAP7MICepOpyDyjEY5slaUM9RYWO/?c
ount=1234567890




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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 25, Issue 385
***************************************

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..."