Avodah Mailing List

Volume 26: Number 42

Wed, 25 Feb 2009

• 1. Re: Akeidah vs. Chet Eigel (rabbirichwol...@gmail.com)
• 2. Re: hutra vs dechuya (rabbirichwol...@gmail.com)
• 3. Re: hutra vs dechuya (Zev Sero)
• 4. Re: Wedding Rings for Men (Micha Berger)
• 5. Re: Friday Nighr blessings (kennethgmil...@juno.com)
• 6. Friday Night Blessings of Married Children (David J Havin)
• 7. Re: Friday Nighr blessings (was "Re: Negiah and Friday night brachot") (Michael Poppers)
• 8. hutra vs dechuya (Shlomo Pick)
• 9. Re: dechuya - hutrah (Yitzhak Grossman)
• 10. Original Sin (Cantor Wolberg)
• 11. Re: Wedding Rings for Men (Michael Poppers)
• 12. Re: Can we force Hashem to do something? (T6...@aol.com)
• 13. Re: hutra vs dechuya (Yitzhak Grossman)
• 14. Printed Ketuva: is it Kosher? (Danny Schoemann)
• 15. Re: shatz saying things out loud a.k.a silent ga'al Yisrael (rabbirichwolpoe@gmail.com)
• 16. Re: Printed Ketuva: is it Kosher? (Zev Sero)
• 17. Re: Printed Ketuva: is it Kosher? (Micha Berger)
• 18. Re: Friday Nighr blessings (kennethgmil...@juno.com)
• 19. Raw Meat and Melicha (rabbirichwol...@gmail.com)

Arie:
> Actually, while Adam doesn't confess, unlike, say Kayin, he actually
> feels shame. I would say that there was charata, just no vidui. But,
> given the magnitude of the sin, that may have been a most major
> lacuna.

The midrash states that adam gave 70 years to David

Point? David rectified (tikkun) the failures of Adam and Sha'ul to be
modeh al ho'emes. Again this is my shabbas shuva drasha not my shabbos
breishis drasha.
Adam's sin AISI was a simple mumar letei'avon and had he not covered up
he would have been OK. (Too bad nixon and clinton didn't learn this.)

What if Sha'ul had said hatasi immediately when Sh'mu'el confronted him
instead of fumferring? He mght have realized (like Re'uven ben Ya'akov)
that he should abdicate in favor of Hashem's choice.? Maybe Yehonosson
for a while?

When Bnai Yisroel were confronted with meraglim they were modeh and
wanted to do tikkun via the ma'apillim but it was too late.

Again I see these 3 cases as special and as paradigms. Actually the
mishna hints @ 2 being paradigms already

KT
RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

Shlomoh Pick:
> Similarly, I believe that shabbos in the mikdash is the same problem.

With regard to:
Shvus?
Mlacha d'oraisso?
Both?

KT
RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

rabbirichwol...@gmail.com wrote:
> Shlomoh Pick:
>> Similarly, I believe that shabbos in the mikdash is the same problem.
> 
> With regard to:
> Shvus?
> Mlacha d'oraisso?
> Both?

The question can only be about d'oraisa, because there never were any
shvusim (shvuyos?) to be mutor or dochuy.  Ein shvus bamikdosh.


-- 
Zev Sero                      The trouble with socialism is that you
z...@sero.name                 eventually run out of other people?s money
                                                     - Margaret Thatcher

On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 04:35:51PM +0200, Dov Ber Ballon wrote:
:> And a man who goes to work with a flirtatious woman is better off with her
:> not even trying.

: True, but that might not justify a widespread acceptance of a new minhag. In
: his particular case, if he's attractive, and she is unaware and etc.
: perhaps.

Since when are we gozeir arayos in such a way? If it's a good idea for
some, then it is a good enough idea to make a general policy. I was saying
that a wedding ring isn't an issue of the man's willingness to stray,
but a warning for female co workers not to bother well before it gets that
far. And thus we have no /less/ motivation than does the rest of society.

It's also not an issue of minhag, but of whether change in fashion
violates the din. Unless you don't wear buttons, ties, or anything else
newer than the old chaluq and tallis that we probably wore in the midbar.

On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 10:54:02AM -0800, Harry Maryles wrote:
: And that - as we know - can invalidate the Kiddushin if it were done
: under the Chupa in immediate sequence to her acceptance?of his ring
: (because it looks like she is giving him back the ring she just got
: from him - unless it is clearly spelled out that that is not what she
: is doing.)

So, let's say it was given during yichud or later...

I stand by my guess that the problem most are stuck on really simlas
ishah. In the qehillos where the numer of men who wear a wedding band
is negligable, the fedora is still "in", and thus innovations like men
wearing wedding rings couldn't gain acceptance.

In the MO world, some wear, some don't. As those that wear, the vast
majority explicitly address RHM's issue.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             "And you shall love H' your G-d with your whole
mi...@aishdas.org        heart, your entire soul, and all you own."
http://www.aishdas.org   Love is not two who look at each other,
Fax: (270) 514-1507      It is two who look in the same direction.

R' Stu Grant wrote:
> It has been acknowledged that the Bircat Habanim is a Minhag
> (perhaps from the time of Yaakov, Ephraim and Menasheh), but
> may not apply to children who already have their own
> households.

Let's stress the "may not", as in "may or may not". I really have no idea
what the poskim say about this minhag. The Shmiras Shabbos doesn't mention
it except in the context of whether or not an Avel can do it during Shiv'a.
Can anyone suggest some mareh Mkomos?

> At all the?Erev Shabbat meals that I have attended as a guest
> I have seen the Baal Habayit bless their children regardless
> of age or marital status.

Ditto. And often the Baalat Habayit as well. And often any guests whose children are present as well.

> Since this is a Minhag, I would be interested in the
> experience and action of other people on this list. I bless
> my daughter after which she blesses her three year old son...

My wife and I try give brachos to all our children every Friday night. This
includes both our biological children, and those who have become our
children by marrying our biological ones. It also includes our
grandchildren, and hopefully some day their spouses.

When we are separated for Shabbos for whatever reason, we give them these
brachos by phone, preferably before Shabbos, and sometimes after Shabbos.
We do not give these brachos in any particular order. (ie: sometimes this
child is first, sometimes that child-in-law is first. It usually ends up
pretty random.)

I can't imagine any reason to davka stop doing this when they get married.
I reluctantly admit that sometimes we forget, and I can certainly
sympathize with those who choose not to go through the bother of phoning
those who are not by the parents on Shabbos, and/or those who feel that a
bracha via phone doesn't count. But if the parents and married children
*are* in the same place over Shabbos, I don't know why being married would
impinge on the parent-child relationship to the point that it would put
these brachos out of the picture.

> To me this is a true representation of Mesorah (though only
> Minhag) and the embodiment of our people's timelessness, as
> hopefully my daughter will bless her eventual grown son and he
> will then turn around and bless his children.

Very nice thought.

> Finally, do we have? a source as to how old Ephraim and Menashe
> were at the time of their blessings from Yaakov and if they had
> families at that time?

I can't prove it offhand, but (being in Parshas Vay'chi) it would seem to
have been at the very end of Yaakov Avinu's life, in the year 2255. The
Torah Anthology, vol 3, pg 645, says that according to Yalkut Shimoni,
Menashe was born in 2230 and Ephraim in 2231, and that according to Seder
Hadoros it was 3 years later, and according to Tzemach David both were born
in 2135. (I'm guessing that's a typo, and he meant 2235.) That would put
their ages at between 20 and 25. Anyone know when they married?

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
Best Weight Loss Program - Click Here!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL21
31/fc/BLSrjnsEGrFQOu3Zhm5mAzREr2vlbrFDXB2L57OkHVJl9PqrAGx4Nm81G28/

On one of my Friday night visits to the Golders Green Beth Hamedrash
("Munks") in London, I saw a father bless his married son immediately after
Yigdal.  They were clearly not having dinner together that night and the
father did not wish to deny himself the opportunity of blessing him.

In Avodah Digest V26#41, RSG apparently replied to something I wrote:
> It has been acknowledged that the Bircat Habanim is a Minhag... but may
not apply to children who already have their own households.??? <
That was my suggestion.  (Again, please see Avodah v8 [Oct2001] for the
previous discussion -- one way to locate it is the Avodah "B" index: look
for "Bir... Haban..." subjects.)

> At all the?Erev Shabbat meals that I have attended as a guest I have seen
the Baal Habayit bless their children regardless?of age or marital
status.?? Since this is a Minhag, I would be interested in the experience
and action of other people on this list.?? I bless my daughter after which
she blesses her three year old son.?? To me this is a true representation
of Mesorah (though only Minhag) and?the embodiment of our people's
timelessness, as hopefully my daughter will bless her eventual grown son
and he will then?turn around and bless his children.?? <
My mother shetichyeh still blesses me whenever she has the opportunity, and
I enjoy receiving a b'rachah from my father-in-law (whom I call "Dad" and
whom I think of that way, esp. as my father a'h' passed away a few days
before I officially became his son-in-law).  I'm not chalilah denying the
benefits, emotional power, etc. of such a custom.

> Finally, do we have? a source as to how old Ephratm and Menashe were at
the time of their blessings from Yaakov and?if they had families at that
time? <
Last, and not least, I would not compare a deathbed-b'rachah situation to
our discussion.

All the best from
--Michael Poppers via RIM pager
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090224/93290f40/attachment-0001.htm>

Halevie that all this was simple.  
Re: shevus bamikdash, see tosofot eiruvin 103a s.v. hah, that a shevus gadol
is assur.  See also shoel umeishiv mahadurah mahadura kamah, vol II, no.
146, that a shavus that is assur be"etzem is assur in mikdash.  Cf. rambam
korban pesach 1:16 and avnei nezer, o.h. vol.w, no. 118:6.

Re: korbanos hutrah in mikdash on Shabbat. The source is yoma 46b. however,
see kesef mishna to hil Shabbat 2:1 who brings a rashba, and repeats this in
beit yosef, orach chayim, 128, that learns according to maimonides that
korbonot on shabbos are dechya. This seems to be maimonides position in bias
mikdasy, 4:9 where he uses the term docheh vis a vis shabbos and korbonot.
While in korban pesach above he uses the term heter for shevus in mikdash. S

Thus, this is the food that a shiru kellali is made from.
Chodesh tov
Shlomo


-----????? ??????-----
???: Zev Sero [mailto:zev.s...@gmail.com] ??? Zev Sero
????: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 10:55 PM
??: rabbirichwol...@gmail.com; A High-Level Torah Discussion Group
????: pic...@mail.biu.ac.il; Micha Berger; elitur...@gmail.com
????: Re: [Avodah] hutra vs dechuya


rabbirichwol...@gmail.com wrote:
> Shlomoh Pick:
>> Similarly, I believe that shabbos in the mikdash is the same problem.
> 
> With regard to:
> Shvus?
> Mlacha d'oraisso?
> Both?

The question can only be about d'oraisa, because there never were any
shvusim (shvuyos?) to be mutor or dochuy.  Ein shvus bamikdosh.


-- 
Zev Sero                      The trouble with socialism is that you
z...@sero.name                 eventually run out of other people?s money
                                                     - Margaret Thatcher


__________ NOD32 3885 (20090224) Information __________

This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com

On Sun, 22 Feb 2009 07:09:43 +0200
Eli Turkel <elitur...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I am giving a shiur on whether shabbat/pikuach nefesh is hutra or dechuya
> 
> does anyone know a source that discusses in general hutra vs dechuya
> and examples of hutra
> most aseh docheh lo taaseh seem to be dechuya

Minhas Hinuch has a valuable discussion of the two concepts and the
distinctions between them (Mizvah 264, section 8 in the Machon
Yerushalayim edition).

Yitzhak
--
Bein Din Ledin - http://bdl.freehostia.com
A discussion of Hoshen Mishpat, Even Ha'Ezer and other matters

R' Ari wrote:
Actually, while Adam doesn't confess, unlike, say Kayin, he actually
feels shame. I would say that there was charata, just no vidui. But,
given the magnitude of the sin, that may have been a most major
lacuna.

What I find interesting is that we don't believe in "original sin" and  
yet, the cheit eitz hadaas WAS the original, first sin.
We all have suffered its consequences until this very day.
It seems to me that since Adam Harishon and Chava had no precedent in  
history (obviously) about sin, how could they
really comprehend the nature of sin, and its gravity, never having  
even seen another case nor experienced anything like it.
In addition, the mitzvah of not eating from the tree was a chok. It  
would seem a pretty difficult way to begin life by being given
a chok without ever having the slightest idea of a rational mitzvah or  
a mishpat.

Anyone agree?

ri

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090224/1622255c/attachment-0001.htm>

In Avodah Digest V26#41, RJIR noted:
> If you take the more
standard approach, it's certainly not a chiyuv for a male in the
workforce to wear a ring but it certainly sounds like an eitzah tova unless
there's a reason not to (e.g. to be different than - who?  -  especially
assuming your covering your head) <
And why must we look any more askance at what could be (and, in my case,
is) a gift from one's wife that one proudly wears every day than we would
at a special-watch gift from one's wife that one proudly wears as a
tachshit on Shabbos v'YT?  Goodness, do I have to note SA OC 161:3 and,
inter alia, MA 161:11 to demonstrate that the concept of wearing a ring
isn't limited to the fairer sex?!  So why are certain people not satisfied
with limiting this discussion, as someone (RJIR?) noted in replying to RDE,
to a wedding-time double-ring ceremony?

All the best from
--Michael Poppers via RIM pager
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090224/82ab880c/attachment-0001.htm>

 

From: David Riceman _driceman@att.net_ (mailto:drice...@att.net) 


> :>  mal'akhim, since they
> :> (particularly when up in Shamayim I there is  broader agreement) have no
> :> bekhirah. "
>
> : Source  please? [[--RRW]
>   


>>See Rashi on last week's parsha 23:21 s.v. "Ki lo yisa  l'pish'achem": 
"Shehu min hakat she'ainan hotin", implying that not all  angels are 
alike in this regard.<<

David  Riceman

 
>>>>>
 
I think that is a misreading of the word "kat" in this case.  It does  not 
mean that there is one group of angels who never sin and another group of  
angels who do sin.  "Hakat she'ainan hotin" refers to the entire class  of angels 
-- in contradistinction to the kat of those who do sin, namely us,  human 
beings.
 

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

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




**************A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1218822736x1201267884/aol?
redir=http:%2F%2Fwww.freecreditreport.com%2Fpm%2Fdefault.aspx%3Fsc%3D668072%26hmpgID<
/a>
%3D62%26bcd%3DfebemailfooterNO62)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090224/de812eab/attachment-0001.htm>

On Wed, 25 Feb 2009 01:47:54 +0200
Shlomo Pick <pic...@mail.biu.ac.il> wrote:

> Halevie that all this was simple.  
> Re: shevus bamikdash, see tosofot eiruvin 103a s.v. hah, that a shevus gadol
> is assur.  See also shoel umeishiv mahadurah mahadura kamah, vol II, no.
> 146, that a shavus that is assur be"etzem is assur in mikdash.  Cf. rambam
> korban pesach 1:16 and avnei nezer, o.h. vol.w, no. 118:6.

As you note, the principle does indeed have many exceptions; certain
shevusin, as you mention, may not be included, and there are numerous
situations in which the principle may not apply.  See the Encyclopedia
Talmudis entry for the principle for a good summary.

Yitzhak
--
Bein Din Ledin - http://bdl.freehostia.com
A discussion of Hoshen Mishpat, Even Ha'Ezer and other matters

While watching a Mesader Kidushin painstakingly fill out 2(!) copies of a
Ketuva, I started wondering.

Would it be OK to have the entire document pre-printed; including the names,
places and dates?

In the 21st century this isn't all that difficult; even if you want a pretty
colorful border on your legal document. :-)

Is there some reason why everything but the signatures are not prepared
beforehand?

Wondering - and tired of waiting those extra 30 minutes.

Chodesh Tov,

- Danny
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090225/9fef80fb/attachment-0001.htm>

David
> At the 
> end of the chazarat ha-sha"tz, the chazan must say yehi 
> ratzon imrei fi...and step back.

Not according to Rema.  He says to step back @ kaddish tiskabal - not needed before

Kt
RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

Danny Schoemann wrote:
> While watching a Mesader Kidushin painstakingly fill out 2(!) copies
> of a Ketuva, I started wondering.  Would it be OK to have the entire
> document pre-printed; including the names, places and dates?
> Is there some reason why everything but the signatures are not prepared 
> beforehand?

Indeed it is OK, and there is a service <http://kesuba.org> that will do
it for you, all but the signatures and the foot of the kuf in "vekanina".
They determine the correct spelling of all names and places, and email it
as a jpeg file which you can print on whatever fancy paper you like, or
they'll print it on gilt-edged paper and UPS it to you.



> Wondering - and tired of waiting those extra 30 minutes.

Even without pre-printing, there's no reason it should take more than
three minutes, *if* the mesader kidushin has done his homework beforehand.
What takes 30 minutes or longer is when he has to ascertain everybody's
correct names on the spot, and then debate with three other rabbonim the
exact spelling of each name and of the town in which it's taking place,
conduct an in-depth inquiry into whether the names he was given are indeed
correct, debate once again the spelling of the *new* names he discovered,
etc.  This may be enormous fun for those directly involved in the debates,
but boring for everyone else.

Be thankful that among Ashkenazim we only put the main names, and the
place name, and omit nicknames, appellations, and rivers.  I was at a
Temani wedding where the rabbanim spent some time discussing which rivers
Brooklyn was on (as if they'd never done a wedding in Brooklyn before!)
and then discovered that the ketuba form that had been bought didn't have
enough room to write everything, so they had to go buy a new form with
bigger spaces!  That delayed things so much that the chatan and kalah
ended up coming in to eat only 20 minutes before the hall had to be
vacated for the next wedding!


-- 
Zev Sero                      The trouble with socialism is that you
z...@sero.name                 eventually run out of other people?s money
                                                    - Margaret Thatcher

I think the question had more to do with why that last quph (or the
entire word "veqanina") had to be done at the wedding.

The reason is mechzei keshaqra if it's not done at the time of the
qinyan, not the vailidity of the kesuvah. Tannaim too.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

I found some sources for this in "Sefer Shema Beni / A Halachic Compendium on the laws of Child Rearing" by Rabbi Dovid Weinberger. He writes:

> Even older children, including married children, should
> receive brochos from their parents.

His sources include:

-- Maavar Yabok 43.

-- Yesodei Yeshurun, section "Kiddush", that one should use both hands.

-- Pachad Yitzchak note 2, pg 54 - to use one hand for a single child, but both hands for a married son.

-- Shu"t Be'er Moshe vol 4, #125 - that the Yaave"tz says to use both hands.

-- Torah Temimah, Naso -- that the Gr"a used only one hand, to avoid appearing like Birkas Kohanim.

Of those seforim, I have only the last one, and it seems to be slightly
off-topic. Perhaps there is another Torah Temimah in Naso which talks about
giving the children a Shabbos Bracha, but what I found was at the bottom of
page 82 (or Mem Aleph amud beis, if you prefer), in the paragraph "Va'ani".
He writes there that the Gra gave a bracha to the Noda B'Yehuda at his
wedding with only one hand, because using two hands is done only for Birkas
Kohanim.

However, an article by Prof. Daniel Sperber of Bar Ilan at http://www.biu
.ac.il/JH/Parasha/eng/vayechi/sper.html gives a very different version
of that story. (And he cites many of Rabbi Weinberger's sources too.)

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
Get down and dirty with these great work clothes! Click now!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL21
31/fc/BLSrjnsNEJVE4zqnpCISaXjWomSUDz2lWILqJf2dMn4aphclS1HTD5LbtJm/

We covered a tricky aspect of Melicha today.

Q:  Does raw meat require melicha to be consumed?

Background:
Given
One may slaughter a beheima for a choleh to eat on Shabbos.. Others may
eat the raw meat because it entails no extra m'lachah.

And Given:
Hadacha IS required to remove surface blood. This is implicit in tur/sa
91 stating that all raw meat is normally rinsed.

EG:
Raw meat to be eaten as above

Raw meat for Zli lechatchila is rinsed

Raw meat for kedeirah is rinsed before salting (hadacha rishona)

Rabbeinu Tam mentions salting for kedeirah. Implying it is not required
for raw meat.

So two sources imply raw meat needs rinsing but not salting.

However any raw meat that is sliced must be re-rinsed because the blood
is poreish.

Q: how can one bite into raw meat w/o causing blood to poreish as with
the knife
or:
is it that being poreish in the mouth does not count
or:
something else.

KT
RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile



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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 26, Issue 42
**************************************

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..."