Avodah Mailing List

Volume 26: Number 186

Fri, 11 Sep 2009

• 1. Re: YT Sheini Shell Golah and the Internet (Micha Berger)
• 2. Re: YT Sheini Shell Golah and the Internet (Zev Sero)
• 3. Re: YT Sheini Shell Golah and the Internet (rabbirichwolpoe@gmail.com)
• 4. Re: who is to blame??; re:moshe rabeinu and Eretz Yisrael???? (Ben Waxman)
• 5. Re: Pesach at equinox (formerly: YT Sheini Shell Golah and the Internet ) (D&E-H Bannett)
• 6. Re: Pesach at equinox (Micha Berger)
• 7. The shape of the Menorah of the Temple (Micha Berger)
• 8. Re: Pesach at equinox (formerly: YT Sheini Shell Golah and the Internet ) (Zev Sero)
• 9. Interesting pesak (Gershon Dubin)
• 10. Re: who is to blame??; re:moshe rabeinu and Eretz Yisrael???? (Zev Sero)
• 11. Re: [Areivim] RHS and dairy (Marty Bluke)
• 12. Re: YT Sheini Shell Golah and the Internet (Marty Bluke)
• 13. Re: YT Sheini Shell Golah and the Internet (Micha Berger)
• 14. Re: YT Sheini Shell Golah and the Internet (Rich, Joel)
• 15. Re: YT Sheini Shell Golah and the Internet (Zev Sero)
• 16. Re: YT Sheini Shell Golah and the Internet (rabbirichwolpoe@gmail.com)
• 17. Re: YT Sheini Shell Golah and the Internet (Zev Sero)

On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 10:14:40PM +0000, rabbirichwol...@gmail.com wrote:
: This begs the question:
: Why can't a mistake be made in EY itself?
: And therefore why not 2 days there?

The way I read the gemara, Abayei is saying that at the time, the
community of Bavel got a letter from Israel telling them that YTSSG is
now a din. BD enacted the din to preserving the way things were done.
[My suggestion is to remember al pi re'iyah.] They gave motivation for
the Bavliim to keep it -- because if they don't, someday there might
be a time when the calendar is forgotten altogether.

But that's incentive, not cause. Because what gets quotes in teshuvos
etc is "minhag avoseihem beyadeihem"; the din is understood as trying
to preserve the past.

: RMBluke:
: > There is a machlokes rishonim whether the second day of yom yov is aminhag
: > or a real din d'rabanan. If the latter, then according to thisRambam it
: > cannot be repealed, and will apply even after moshiach

: Lav davka
: The p'saq afaik was predicated upon Hillel II's calculations. When that
: system goes away so might the gzeira.

: [Aside from the fact that a new Sanhedrin may not be bound by any
: precedent anymore, just core TSBK and TSBP. All post-Sinai legislation,
: p'saq, etc. could be subject to review.]

I notice that if you buy into my idea that the general citation of
"minhag avoseihem beyadeihem" is definitive, and therefore one must read
the letter Abayei mentions as a shmuess, YTSSG is not a gezeirah. It
wasn't enacted in order to prevent an error. Rather it's a taqanah,
therefore even the Rambam would allow a repeal.

Off-list, RRW and I discussed this notion of the permanence of gezeiros
WRT dancing and hand-clapping on Shabbos. I think RRW is assuming lav
davka we hold like the Rambam, the future Sanhedrin could hold like
Tosafos.

In the discussio of why we dance on Shabbos, the Rama (OC 339:3) brings
Tosafos (Beitza 30a), which really does appear to ignore or at least
reduce gezeiros that lack any reason.

The Elya Rabba limits this Tosafos to incidentals in the gezeira. The
essence of the gezeira is playing musical instruments. Hand clapping
and dancing were added as effectively musical instruments, and therefore
these two side-items could be repealed leshitas Tosafos.

Mecholos was prohibited, which is dancing as a percussion instrument.
This is befeirush in the Y-mi.
The question of whether that includes all dancing is a matter of pesaq.
The Toras Shabbos understand the Y-mi as only including dancing where
there is a period of time when both feet are off the floor.
And so many rely on the Tosafos WRT dancing only because of a
combination of senifim lehaqeil.

The MB cites the Maharal that Tosafos is talking bemaqom mitzvah. So,
dancing for divrei chol on Shabbos would still be assur.

Taking a temperature for piryah verivyah, where the reason doesn't apply
(goods for sale are not measured by temperature) and its bemaqom mitzvah
would therefore qualify for Tosafos's qulah. (Which is akin to what RZS
already said in that thread.)

RMF (IM OC 2:100) seems to say that in general, Tosafos's shitah is
explicable by placing the reason as an adjective to the item. The gezeira
wasn't on mayim megulim as megulim, but on water that has a cheshash of
containing venom. RMF gives melakh sedomis as another (more explicit,
IMHO) example of where Tosafos see the sezeira as limited to instances
where the risk exists. RMF can't understand the case of dancing using
this explanation, and therefore he is maarich.

The point of all this it twofold:
I found these mar'eh meqomos, largely from R' Yonasan Sigler, and
thought others might be interested.

More on point to our discussion, we see that later development of the
din struggles with and limits the Tosafos. The Elya Rabba wouldn't
apply it to YT sheini, since we're talking about the core gezeira.
Those who also invoke the Y-mi don't have other senifim lehaqeil
YTSSG. The Maharal's sevara would apply to doing a devar mitzvah
only. (A formula rife with possibilities of YT sheini falling apart
altogether, as per the C driving responsum, but that's a side issue.)
And leshitas RMF, you would have to argue that the gezeira was on
a yom tov sheini that might get confused only, a shverer argument but I
guess it could be made.

All of which presumes that it's in the technical category of gezeiros,
and not another kind of din derabbanan.

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Man is equipped with such far-reaching vision,
mi...@aishdas.org        yet the smallest coin can obstruct his view.
http://www.aishdas.org                         - Rav Yisrael Salanter
Fax: (270) 514-1507

rabbirichwol...@gmail.com wrote:

> I am suggesting that [possibly] the taqqnah encompass the OLD
> perimeter which was "maqqom shemagiin. And that was about 12 days
> walking distance from the BD.
> 
> I would suggest that now in the jet age and the internet age, that
> the "maqqom magi'in" peirmeter is globally inclusive!

That would be fine, if the terms of the decree to observe the 2nd day
nowadays had said anything about "where shluchim reach".  But it
didn't.  What it said was "keep on doing what you've been doing until
now".  Since we were keeping the second day, we must continue to do so.
Only those who never kept the second day may continue not keeping it.
(The Rambam applies this principle even in EY, wherever there is no
established minhag of keeping one day!)

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

Saul Stokar:
http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol03/v03n040.shtml#03
> the fact that the Torah refers to Pessach as occuring in "Chodesh HaAviv"
> (the spring month) seems to imply that Pessach should begin within 30
> days following the vernal equinox. In fact, in 1303 Pessach began on
> April 22 (I am using the Gregorian date,

Quibble

I could say that Rosh Hodesh Nissan [Rather than Pesach] has to occur within
about 29.5 days of the Vernal Equinox. That would create "Hodesh Ha'aviv.".
Pesach then could fall 14 days later total about 43 days after the equinox.

Shana Tova
RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

When someone looses their temper, they have no one to blame but themselves. 

Ben
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: T6...@aol.com 

  >>>>>
  It was B'Y's fault that Moshe lost his temper.  If they hadn't provoked him he never would have hit the rock.


  --Toby Katz==========
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090911/cac2a8e4/attachment-0001.htm>

On the posting that Pesach is getting later and later in the 
year and the statement that <<"2215 Pesach will begin on 
April 25th.">>, R' Micha calculated that it will happen 
again only in the very distant future and, therefore, 
nothing to worry about.

Pesach will not be after chodesh ha'aviv in 2215, but rather 
in 2214. But in addition to this minor slip, there is a 
"slight" error in the logic.

Using average solar and lunar years for the calculations 
tells us nothing. If we remember that we have a 19-year 
cycle with seven leap years, each with an added month in 
that cycle, it becomes obvious that Pesach moves back and 
forth depending on the year. In leap years, Adar Sheni 
delays Pesch by a month making it late in the solar year.  I 
turns out that Pesach is latest in the eighth year of the 
cycle and only slightly less late in years 19 and 11.

Pesach in Chodesh Ha'aviv is not a problem for the future 
but one that already exists.  For example, in 2005 (year 8 
of cycle), the first day of Pesach was on April 24th. In 
2016 (year 19), it will be on April 23.

In year 8, the worst case, Pesach has not been in Chodesh 
Ha'aviv for well over 400 years  and has gradually begun to 
appear in the other leap years as well.

Many suggestion have made to correct the luach but, in the 
absence of a Sanhedrin, we will not ever have full agreement 
among the posekim so nothing is done.

I quote R' Rahamim Sar-Shalom a luach expert: In 1538 
inTzefat 25 rabbanim gave semikha to R' Yakov Bei-Rav and he 
gave semikha to four others including R' Yosef Caro.  R' 
Levi ben Haviv, the rav of Yerushalayim, objected strongly. 
Among the objections was his "fear" that appointment of a 
bet din of musmakhim would lead to to many s'fekot in 
renewing kiddush hachodesh and 'ibur hashana.

BTW, the basic question is whether chodesh ha'aviv is 
astronomical or agricultural and how accurate we have to be.

When I questioned  R' Levi Yitzhak Halperin some years ago 
on late Pesach, he replied that we needn't be astronomically 
accurate and Mashiach would come long before the situation 
deteriorated further.


kvh"t,

David

On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 04:33:16PM +0300, D&E-H Bannett wrote:
: Pesach will not be after chodesh ha'aviv in 2215, but rather 
: in 2214. But in addition to this minor slip, there is a 
: "slight" error in the logic.

: Using average solar and lunar years for the calculations 
: tells us nothing. If we remember that we have a 19-year 
: cycle with seven leap years, each with an added month in 
: that cycle, it becomes obvious that Pesach moves back and 
: forth depending on the year...

But having values around that mean (otherwise it wouldn't stay the mean,
would it? <g>). I figured it was close enough to give us an estimate.

: Pesach in Chodesh Ha'aviv is not a problem for the future 
: but one that already exists.  For example, in 2005 (year 8 
: of cycle), the first day of Pesach was on April 24th. In 
: 2016 (year 19), it will be on April 23.

Here you shift topics. You assume there is a single chodesh haAviv,
and therefore yes, the calendar is failing alreary. (BTW, just look for
any year in which the Notzrim celebrate their holiday closer to Purim
than Pesach.)

RJR asked about it not being in spring -- a much wider window. Behind
this is the assumption that "aviv" means spring, and thus any month in
spring would be a chodesh ha'aviv.

Even if chodesh ha'aviv wasn't the name of the first month in aviv, I
now realize that it's more likely aviv is only 2 months long, not three;
that the pasuq divides the year into 6 two-month seasons that come in
3 oppositional pairs: "zera veqatzir veqor vachom veqayitz vechoref"
(Bereishis 8:22) And yes,those are seasons. E.g. see Seforno ad loc who
says that the mabul cause the start of seasonal variation.

That removes a month from my estimate, but if chodesh haaviv needn't be
the first chodesh we still have a month of slippage possible. And the
problem is still millennia way.

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             The fittingness of your matzos [for the seder]
mi...@aishdas.org        isn't complete with being careful in the laws
http://www.aishdas.org   of Passover. One must also be very careful in
Fax: (270) 514-1507      the laws of business.    - Rav Yisrael Salanter

We discussed at length in the past (back in Chanukah 2003, eg RSM's post
at <http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol12/v12n065.shtml#12>) the question
of the shape of the branches of the menorah in the BHMQ. Here's another
data point in facor of curved arms.

> Full article at
> http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/133388
> by Gil Ronen

> (IsraelNN.com) The Israel Antiquities Authority has uncovered one of
> the world's oldest synagogues in an excavation at Migdal, near the Sea
> of Galilee (Kinneret). Inside the synagogue, a stone relief contains a
> depiction of the seven branched Menorah which stood in the Temple, and
> which was most likely seen by the artist who sculpted the stone
> relief.

> Known depictions of the Menorah from Second Temple times include the
> famous relief of Titus's Arch in Rome, which shows Roman soldiers
> taking it away after destroying the Temple, and depictions on
> contemporary coins as well as graffiti etched into stone in
> Jerusalem's Jewish Quarter. However, the new find is said to be the
> first which includes a relief etched by an artist contemporary with
> the Temple.

(Hat tip: R' Yisrael Markov on scjm.)

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             When we are no longer able to change a situation
mi...@aishdas.org        -- just think of an incurable disease such as
http://www.aishdas.org   inoperable cancer -- we are challenged to change
Fax: (270) 514-1507      ourselves.      - Victor Frankl (MSfM)

D&E-H Bannett wrote:

> Pesach in Chodesh Ha'aviv is not a problem for the future but one that 
> already exists.  For example, in 2005 (year 8 of cycle), the first day 
> of Pesach was on April 24th. In 2016 (year 19), it will be on April 23.
> 
> In year 8, the worst case, Pesach has not been in Chodesh Ha'aviv for 
> well over 400 years  and has gradually begun to appear in the other leap 
> years as well.

I think you're making a basic mistake: "shamor et chodesh ha'aviv", in
its astronomical sense, means that Nissan must not come *before* the
equinox, not that it must come immediately after.  In fact we *know*
that it need not be the month immediately after the equinox, because
in addition to the astronomical date, which is easily determined, the
BD also took into account the state of the roads, the barley crops,
and the lambing season.  That can only mean that sometimes the BD would
add a month to the year *even though the equinox had already passed*,
but it had been too cold or wet.  Clearly, therefore, "shamor et
chodesh ha'aviv" cannot possibly mean what you seem to say it means.

Therefore the problem will not arise for a very long time, and by
then it will surely have become moot.  But if ch"v it doesn't, I
believe it would be covered by "atem afilu {shogegin, mut'in, anusin,
mezidin}".


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

Rav Ruven Feinstein spoke this Monday at a Hakhel shiur.  He asked what a
woman should do if she does not have sufficient time to say both pesukei
dezimra and kerias shema with the berachos. (He did not deal with partial
pesukei dezimra.)  That shemoneh esrei was priority was assumed.
He said in the name of his father that since K"Sh is zeman gerama, and the
berachos flow with that, she should say pesukei dezimra since it is related
to the shemonei esrei in which is definitely mechuyeves.

Gershon
gershon.du...@juno.com
____________________________________________________________
Save On Health Insurance
Compare health insurance companies and save money today.

http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/c?cp=zL1oNkmm9SPicZuJW3hJegAAJ1BiY
jhMSt0qMJcLz_08tNkJAAQAAAAFAAAAAGtXgD0AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACJY5AAAAAA==
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090911/b024dd2a/attachment-0001.htm>

Harvey Benton wrote:
> rtk: It was B'Y's fault that Moshe lost his temper.  If they hadn't 
> provoked him he never would have hit the rock.
> 
> Hb:yet why did moshe make a complete distinction from what Hashem had 
> told him was the explicit reason Moshe couldn't enter EYisrael?????????
> We are called anshei emes, a leader like moshe (of a nation called 
> anshei emes) shouldn't change what Hashem explicity told him (unless 
> Hashem agreed to the second version that we have in Dvarim)   


Because it was just an excuse.  Teriveihu al mei merivah.

> On the topic of changes..... we are also told also that Moshe changed a 
> large aleph to a small one....against Hashem's will.........hb

Huh?  Where are we told such a thing?


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

RHS holds like this because nowadays they do a procedure to all cows
(something related to puncturing the stomach) that may make them a
treifa. This is not a natural occurrence.

R' Wolpoe wrote:

<[Aside from the fact that a new Sanhedrin may not be bound by any
precedent anymore, just core TSBK and TSBP. All post-Sinai
legislation, p'saq, etc. could <be subject to review.]

According to the Rambam this is simply not true. The Rambam Mamrim 2:3
writes that a gezera to prevent you from violating a d'oraysa can
never be repealed even by a Beis din gadol b'chochma u'bminyan. There
is no reason to think that this will not apply after Moshiach as well.
According to the Rambam once a gezera is made it can never be
repealed.

On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 02:54:45PM +0300, R Marty Bluke wrote:
: According to the Rambam this is simply not true. The Rambam Mamrim 2:3
: writes that a gezera to prevent you from violating a d'oraysa can
: never be repealed even by a Beis din gadol b'chochma u'bminyan. There
: is no reason to think that this will not apply after Moshiach as well.
: According to the Rambam once a gezera is made it can never be
: repealed.

Sorry, nothing specific about RMBlum's here, it's just that I'm seeing
a lot of something lately on Avodah and felt a need to speak up.

RRW already explained his position based on a Tosafos. Reiterating that
the Rambam disagrees doesn't change his ability to hold like Tosafos
(fellow Ashkenazim, no less). Someone else did this recently when I
replied to something on kol kevudah according to the Rambam and the
Chasam Sofer by reposting something by RMTorczyner based on Rashi.
And that writer too felt a need to reiterate his sources.

I'm wondering why that is. Has "we can be meyasheiv the shitos" become
so commonplace that we think that if someone reaches a different
conclusion based on a different rishon, it's not just the preexisting
machloqes? Or is it bedavka the Rambam, because the Yad is so easy to
use (particularly for email addicts), that we're turning into Teimanim?

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Man is equipped with such far-reaching vision,
mi...@aishdas.org        yet the smallest coin can obstruct his view.
http://www.aishdas.org                         - Rav Yisrael Salanter
Fax: (270) 514-1507

 > So what will we do when Pesach rotates out of the aviv?


Sorry, you've lost me.	How does that question follow from anything said
before?  Or is it just a random question, since we're talking about the
fixed calendar?  If so, if it ever ch"v becomes a problem we'll have to
deal with it.  I assume the resolution, should it ch"v be necessary, will
be that this is the day that the Sanhedrin decreed will be Rosh Chodesh,
and whether they were wise to have done so is irrelevant.  "Atem afilu
mezidim".

-- 
Zev Sero                     
=========================================
Fixed calendar question - if you say chazal instituted it so that would
never go back al pi hariah- did they assume the world wouldn't last long
enough for this to be  a problem or were they unaware of the problem.

KVCT
Joel Rich
THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE 
ADDRESSEE.  IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL 
INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE.  Dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 
strictly prohibited.  If you received this message in error, please notify us 
immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message.  
Thank you.

Micha Berger wrote:
> Taking a temperature for piryah verivyah, where the reason doesn't
> apply (goods for sale are not measured by temperature)

The reason for the issur on measuring has nothing to do with goods
for sale. It's not a shvus against writing, it's just uvdin dechol
and zilzul shabbos. Measuring for a mitzvah is specifically allowed,
but so is stam measuring for no purpose at all; the only thing that is
not allowed is measuring for some specific non-mitzvah purpose. So it's
not like dancing at all. Allowing it for a mitzvah isn't a "modern"
(i.e. rishonic) kulah, it's an explicit mishna.

[Email #2. -mi]

Micha Berger wrote:
> :                          ... I assume the resolution, should it ch"v
> : be necessary, will be that this is the day that the Sanhedrin decreed
> : will be Rosh Chodesh, and whether they were wise to have done so is
> : irrelevant.  "Atem afilu mezidim".

> But this isn't as much a question of when is Rosh Chodesh as much as
> which chodesh it's the rosh of.  Is there a maqor that beis din can
> be meizidim on ibbur hashanah too? It is all one thing -- BD is
> meqadeish a particular month (month 13 or month 1)?

I should have stuck with my first draft, which was "...the day that
the Sanhedrin decreed will be Pesach...". Ibbur hashana is even more
in BD's hands than is kiddush hachodesh. KhCh is not *meant* to be
a judgement call; in the normal course of events they hear the eidim,
find them trustworthy or not, and decide accordingly. The power they
have to ignore or manipulate eidim is to be used very sparingly if
at all. I don't think "afilu mezidim" means that BD has the *right*
to deliberately mess with Rosh Chodesh, but that they have the *power*;
if they did it they were wrong, but Rosh Chodesh is still whenever they
said it is. However with ibbur hashana it is very much a judgement
call; BD have various criteria they look at, and *they* *decide* whether
an extra month is called for or not. So if they got that wrong, kol
shekein that we have to follow them anyway. At least so it seems to me.

[Email #3. -mi]

rabbirichwol...@gmail.com wrote:
> RZS
>> in Beitza 4b.  "Sometimes the government might make a decree, and
>> you will come to get confused", i.e. if Torah is suppressed everyone
>> who is capable of doing his own calculations will have to do so, and
>> someone might make a mistake.

> This begs the question:

I don't think that's what you meant to say. Perhaps you meant that it
invites the question

> Why can't a mistake be made in EY itself?
> And therefore why not 2 days there?

You could as easily ask, why is two days enough? Why not a day earlier
too, in case people will add a day instead of dropping one? When the only
failure mode was that the previous month could be either 29 or 30 days,
and we didn't know which, there were only two days on which yomtov could
possibly be; but when the failure mode is that we might miscalculate, the
error could go in either direction. And what if we add or drop two days?
Ein ladavar sof! (OK, if the error got too big we'd see the moon and
realise something was wrong.)

It seems to me that the worry about people miscalculating was not enough
to justify establishing a new practise of keeping two days of yomtov,
where no such practise had existed earlier. But in Bavel we had already
been keeping two days for generations; now our question was whether we
could finally stop doing so, and the Sanhedrin decided that since we
were already doing it we should continue, in case we will miscalculate.
Those places that never had the minhag were not required to adopt it.
(The Rambam's take would be slightly different: only those places that
already had the established minhag of keeping one day were allowed to
continue doing so; in effect, *they* were the ones to keep their lenient
minhag avot, while every other place must keep two, including places in
EY that had no minhag because there were never any Jews there.)

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

RZS
> Those places that never had the minhag were not required to adopt it.

Agrees
Therefore any Jew who moved out of his year 358 CE location were now
off the hook - such as Western Hemisphere
And the original gzeira has faded away accept maybe Iraq and Persia!

Shana Tova
RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

Rich, Joel wrote:
> Fixed calendar question - if you say chazal instituted it so that
> would never go back al pi hariah

Huh?  Who said that?  Of course we will go back to doing it al pi
re'iyah, as soon as we can.



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


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 26, Issue 186
***************************************

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..."