Avodah Mailing List

Volume 26: Number 258

Mon, 21 Dec 2009

• 1. Re: Repeating Shemoneh Esrei (kennethgmil...@juno.com)
• 2. Re: How to light the Menorah (Michael Poppers)
• 3. tzedaka priority (Saul.Z.New...@kp.org)
• 4. repeating shemonei esrei (Eli Turkel)
• 5. Re: LBD Lists (Ben Waxman)
• 6. Re: Glycerine in mouth wash (Akiva Blum)
• 7. mouthwash (Dov Kaiser)
• 8. Re: mouthwash (rabbirichwol...@gmail.com)
• 9. Re: How to light the Menorah (Saul Mashbaum)
• 10. Re: How to light the Menorah (Micha Berger)
• 11. Just How hot is Yad Soledes Bo anyway? (rabbirichwol...@gmail.com)
• 12. Re: How to light the Menorah (rabbirichwol...@gmail.com)
• 13. Re: tzedaka priority (Micha Berger)
• 14. Three from RSRH (Yitzchok Levine)

R' Micha Berger asked:
> ... IOW, why do we repeat?
> 1- Is it that these things have to be said, ...
> 2- Or is it a pesul in the SE ...

My recollection is that this is an unresolved machlokes. The examples you
brought all sound identical to the case of a person who forgot Yaaleh
V'Yavo at Mincha of Rosh Chodesh, but didn't realize it until Maariv time,
after Rosh Chodesh is over. Does he say Tashlumin to make up for the pasul
mincha, or does he not bother because it won't include the missing Yaaleh
V'Yavo?

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
Water Heater
Some like it hot. Click now for a reliable new water heater!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2131/c?cp=225C66rDniBI6qDF4NIfuQAAJ
z3zeK-F0bLcqGb51B0rOTOKAAYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGIAAAAAA=

In Avodah Digest, Vol 26, Issue 257, RAM responded to RRW:
>> Why not just when using an oil lamp for shammos - simply light all oil
lamps using a plain old paraffin Hanukkah Candle?! <<
> I tried this exact idea once. I found the problem to be that the candle
drips paraffin onto the menorah, especially when the candle is moved, or
when it is held in any position other than totally vertical. <
The bayis that bought our chanukiyah also purchased small glass
bowl-inserts for it.  I tilt the candle-shammash only while it's over the
given neir's bowl and bring it back to vertical before it leaves the
airspace over that bowl.

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/20091218/c841caf6/attachment-0001.htm>

so the tenor  i hear is  it  is  mussar-ly  not  a great idea, and 
occaisionally may fall into the issur of nekama category.  this is my 
distinction of  positive vs  negative.
so  using  concrete examples : 

 take  for example , kollel lifestyle or  position on the state of israel. 
  so in a  positive  direction,  one might  davka  want to direct his 
tzedaka   TOWARDS  kollelim,  or  TOWARDS the yeshivot  of  a particular 
eidah.       -- this i think no one objects to 

in the negative  direction  ,  one  might NEVER give  money to a kollel  ; 
or  would  NEVER  give money to a yeshiva of a certain eidah.
--- in this case ,  rMB  would hold  it to be  a poor  midah ; [ the 2nd 
part -- mosdos  of particular eidos-- is more complicated , because one 
can always  say a certain eidah  is 'krum', and therefore  there might be 
an actual isssur to SUPPORT those mosdos]

now there is  one other  situation , which is  probably closer  to what 
rMB  would  consider an issur tora.  that would  be  a particular  mossad 
does a behavior/expresses an opinion  that  one NOW  finds out about, and 
vigourously  disagrees with.  rMB would  hold , i think, that this would 
now  be  an issur of nekama  to withhold  funds from .

   i think though  an alternate perspective  would be  that  that  mossad 
now  becomes  assur to the disagreeing  individual, to the point  that 
rather than holding  it's assur NOT to give to it  [as nekama] , it's now 
assur to YES  give to it  [as krumkeit, punishment for bad behaviour, etc] 




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20091218/4f0c0264/attachment-0001.htm>

<<IOW, why do we repeat?

1- Is it that these things have to be said, and since that requires an SE,
we repeat the whole SE?
In which case, everything necessary was already said, so there is no
need for the third repetition.

2- Or is it a pesul in the SE not to say everything coined for that
tefillah?
In which case, he has yet to say a complete SE, and needs to try yet
again.>>

It is a machkloket of 2 opinions in Tosafot. The question appears when
one forgets yaale veyovah eg rosh chodesh but the next tefilla is already
maariv after rosh chodesh. Does it pay to say maariv twice since in any case
one will not say yaale veyavoh.

The psak is to say an extra shemonei as a nedavah. However, if the makeup would
be on friday night when we dont say a tefilla nedava then one does not say
the makeup shemonei esre


-- 
Eli Turkel

I have to admit that I don't fully understand the Shakh and all of his ins 
and outs on this one. Having said that, I have a problem with your 
interpretation. The Sha"kh talks about two situations - one where someone 
doesn't eat something because of din and one in which he doesn't eat because 
of minhag. He gives rules for both, rules for the host and rules for the 
guest. But according to what you are saying, as long as someone doesn't hold 
that the food is assur al pi din, then he should eat and be done with it. 
Why tehn did the Sha"kh give all these rules and conditions? He could have 
said for example "If you don't eat non-glatt meat because you hold like the 
Beit Yosef, than you can't eat that meat ever. If you don't because you want 
to be makhmir, than go ahead, bon appetit".

Ben
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Isaac Balbin" <Isaac.Bal...@rmit.edu.au>

My reading of it would indicate that where the person has reason to think 
there is a "hetter" to be found in consuming food which he is not noheg to 
normally eat, and he normally resides in a place which isn't noheg to 
consume that food item and is now in a place that is noheg to consume that 
food item, that he is able to eat it? 

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: avodah-boun...@lists.aishdas.org 
> [mailto:avodah-boun...@lists.aishdas.org] On Behalf Of 
> rabbirichwol...@gmail.com
> Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 6:22 PM

> Ok so for those who enjoy ingesting mouthwash -shavya a nafsham haticha
> d'issura
> 

I believe the correct term is achshevei.

Akiva

There has been discussion on Areivim about the kashrus of mouthwash.  I
found this in an article by R. Chaim Jachter (at http://www.koltorah.org/ravj/14-31_Cosmetics_and_Toiletries_for_P
esach_4.htm):
 
I recall that Rav Hershel Schachter told me (in 1991) that even if
toothpaste has a pleasant taste, it is nonetheless considered Eino Ra?ui
Liachilat Kelev. He reasons that since the toothpaste is still inedible and
not meant to be swallowed it is considered Eino Ra?ui Liachilat Kelev, even
if the toothpaste tastes pleasant while it is in one?s mouth. Rav Schachter
apparently understands that the Rama (Y.D. 108:4) prohibition forbidding
tasting a forbidden item applies only if the item is suitable to be eaten
and one intends to eat it. On the other hand, Rav Eider (ad. loc.) writes
(based on this Rama), ?Flavored lipsticks may not be used on Pesach.? Rav
Eider believes that one may not taste even an inedible item that one does
not intend to swallow.
This debate seems to impact the question of using mouthwash for Pesach that
contains inedible Chametz (many contain denatured alcohol). Rav Eider
probably would forbid using mouthwash that has a ?minty taste? or other
pleasant taste (as opposed to a ?medicine-like taste?), whereas Rav Hershel
Schachter would likely permit it. Indeed, Rav Meir Bransdorfer (Teshuvot
Knei Bosem 1:25) writes that mouthwash is permitted on Pesach if it has
inedible Chametz only if it is not intended for eating or to enjoy the
taste of it. This seems to imply that he would forbid using mouthwash
unless it has a ?medicine-like taste.? Rav Elazar Meyer Teitz also
recommends to his Elizabeth, NJ community on Pesach not to use mouthwash
that has a pleasant taste if it contains inedible Chametz. All would
apparently agree (see Rav Heber ad. loc.) that products that are
intentionally swallowed such as breath spray and breath freshener strips
require Kashrut certification for Pesach and year round.
 
Back to me (DK).  If I remember correctly, the London Beth Din Pesach Guide
permits the original Listerine on Pesach.  Perhaps this is for the same
reason - it does not have a pleasant taste.
 
Kol tuv,
Dov Kaiser                                        
_________________________________________________________________
Got more than one Hotmail account? Save time by linking them together
 http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/186394591/direct/01/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20091220/202aa993/attachment-0001.htm>

RDK: 
> Back to me (DK). If I remember correctly, the London Beth Din Pesach
> Guide permits the original Listerine on Pesach. Perhaps this is for the
> same reason -- it does not have a pleasant taste.

When I was in 9th grade [circa 1966] my rebbe quoted RYDS that all
toothpaste was kosher for Passover.

[See also the story/legend about when RYBS taught this in shiur that R
Richard Schiltz retold on scj at
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.jewish/msg/e7b761431901bd76
-mi]

I raised this issue with My LOR -- R William Cohen OBM [who was just
recently niftar shy of his 90th brithday] and told me something like this:

"It doesn't take a JB Soloveichik to be mattir toothpaste on Pesach! The
[real] reason for using "kosher toothpaste" is more about giving parnassa
to a Jewish businessmen... "

Shma mina trei

It seems toothpaste is a davar pashur that it's eino rauy l'achilas kelev,
hence muttar if made. Before Pesach.

 From a hashkafa pov, there are tzedakka and other reasons for using
toothpaste with a hashgacha when possible.

 --

I have made it my policy to go out of my way and spend a few cents more
to help a Jewish [esp a frum] entrepreneur

I have also found that I'm in a tiny minority of Jews that actually think
this way. I wonder why? I guess as an impressionable 14 -- year-old I
took my LOR's private conversation to heart as based upon Maimonidean
principles of tzedakah.

Most Jews seem to be complaining about these kinds of "humros" costing
them money.

CAVEAT: I'm only referring to a nominal premium in exchange for helping
a fellow Jew make a living. Certainly an exorbitant premium is another
matter and beyond the scope of this pos.

Another Caveat: really tasty mouthwash might be different than toothpastes
of the 1960's.

Thank You for allowing me to share a memory of R.W. Cohen OBM 

KT 
RRW 
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

RAFolger

>>

... and for making sure that the room is lit, one very great shamash,
more mehuddar than all others, is (are) the light bulb(s) in the room.

>>

Indeed RSZA said explicitly that in a room lit by electric lights, mikkar
hadin there is no obligation to light a shamash.
See Halichot Shlomo Vol I, 16:13, p 309.

Saul Mashbaum
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20091220/f6ed3901/attachment-0001.htm>

On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 11:05:36PM +0200, Saul Mashbaum wrote:
: Indeed RSZA said explicitly that in a room lit by electric lights, mikkar
: hadin there is no obligation to light a shamash.
: See Halichot Shlomo Vol I, 16:13, p 309.

This is how I understood the original question...

You pragmatically need something to light the menoros.

There is a din "ein lanu reshus lehishtameish bahem", and therefore we
need another light in the room in order to avoid doing something solely
by their light.

Historically, those were the same neir.

Now, here's the question AIUI, and if I'm wrong, I'm asking it now:
Is that use of a single neir for both a minhag? IOW, there may be no
obligation mei'iqar hadin one way or the other, but does one miss out
on a minhag by using an oil or the room's electric fixture for the extra
light rather than the flame one used for lighting?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             One who kills his inclination is as though he
mi...@aishdas.org        brought an offering. But to bring an offering,
http://www.aishdas.org   you must know where to slaughter and what
Fax: (270) 514-1507      parts to offer.        - R' Simcha Zissel Ziv

FWIW: I recently consulted my chaveir the chemist.
He agrees with me completely that Hazal lacked a way of quantifying
temperature because such scales had not yet been devised [EG fahreheit
and celcius]

OTOH, he completely disagreed with me over this issue: if they had had
such objective scales, would hazal given more precise temperatures?
He says NO I say YES.
IOW he maintains that Hazal were intentionally vague. He notes that
Hazal could gave use the temperature of "when egg whites turn milky
white" which is close to YSB and slightly more obejective. [Note: My
chaveir is not only a chemist but a pretty good cook, too.]

OTOH I maintain that just like revi'is log and other measures that Hazal
usually offer a precise measurement.
[EG size/weight of dinar in mishnah Qiddushin]

Tangent:
Sometimes I do find the breadth of temperature range re: YSB bishul
hard to understand; EG for Yayin Mevushal

KT
RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

Micha 
> Historically, those were the same neir. 
> Now, here's the question AIUI, and if I'm wrong, I'm asking it now: 
> Is that use of a single neir for both a minhag? IOW, there may be no 
> obligation mei'iqar hadin one way or the other, but does one miss out 
> on a minhag by using an oil or the room's electric fixture for the extra 
> light rather than the flame one used for lighting? 
 
AIUI this case of "nohagim" is pragmatic -- IOW that's what people
commonly did, ie light the menorah with the Shamash
 
I get no sense that this davka creates an obligation.
 
The pashut raya is that for years charitable organizations have been
distributing wick-lick items made with olive oil to light the candles --
which are in no way shamassim
 
KT 
RRW 
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 07:49:02AM -0800, Saul.Z.New...@kp.org wrote:
: so the tenor  i hear is  it  is  mussar-ly  not  a great idea, and 
: occaisionally may fall into the issur of nekama category.

Well, that's at least my position, I'm not sure that's a general tenor.

:                                                            this is my 
: distinction of  positive vs  negative.
: so  using  concrete examples : 
...
: in the negative  direction  ,  one  might NEVER give  money to a kollel  ; 
: or  would  NEVER  give money to a yeshiva of a certain eidah.
: --- in this case ,  rMB  would hold  it to be  a poor  midah...

I don't agree with your turning my statement into action. Neqama (and
certainly my Mussar concerns) reflects why something is done, not what
is done.

For example:

Shimon needs a snowblower, goes to Levi, who refuses to lend it to him.
The next year, the positions are reversed -- Levi has a snowblower,
and it's Shimon who needs it. Levi refuses to lend it to Shim'on.

Scenerio 1: neqama
"Why should I lend it to him? He is a lousy neighbor who I know from
experience wouldn't do so for me?"

Scenario 2:
"I saw how he handled his snowblower, and I really can't afford risking
his breaking the blade on mine."

Similarly in your negative direction example -- one might never give
moey to a kollel or the yeshivos of a certain eidah because there is
always a pressing concern closer to one's home.

: now there is  one other  situation , which is  probably closer  to what 
: rMB  would  consider an issur tora.  that would  be  a particular  mossad 
: does a behavior/expresses an opinion  that  one NOW  finds out about, and 
: vigourously  disagrees with.  rMB would  hold , i think, that this would 
: now  be  an issur of nekama  to withhold  funds from .

That's more strongly than I put it. I would rather say there is need to
consult a poseiq, because there are questions of the issur neqamah to
be asked.

:    i think though  an alternate perspective  would be  that  that  mossad 
: now  becomes  assur to the disagreeing  individual, to the point  that 
: rather than holding  it's assur NOT to give to it  [as nekama] , it's now 
: assur to YES  give to it  [as krumkeit, punishment for bad behaviour, etc] 

I am not as likely to label a mossad that promotes Torah umitzvos
as wrong. Wrong for me, yes. But wrong in an objective sense? RYBS's
comments about his uncle's Zionism aside, don't you think that the point
was that funding the learning of Brisker Torah is funding the learning
of Brisker Torah? Regardless of one's differences with the yeshiva
in question?

It's not like any eidah found a way of living that has no problems
whatsoever. Living in the finitude of the real world means choosing
pros and cons. We all have the problems that we are prone to because
our derekh makes them more likely, we all have problems our derekh is
more likely to avoid.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Every second is a totally new world,
mi...@aishdas.org        and no moment is like any other.
http://www.aishdas.org           - Rabbi Chaim Vital
Fax: (270) 514-1507

[I combined three of RYL's posts of RSRH's words into one, to try to
keep the overhead down. -micha]

Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2009 12:03:19 -0500
Subject: Superstition and Good Fortune

RSRH write on Bereishis 44

        5 This is the one from which my master drinks, and he has a
        presentiment about it. What you have done is evil.

    The higher a persons rank, the more marvelous his fortune, the more
    superstitious will he become (one need only think of Napoleon);
    for he himself is surprised at his good fortune. An ordinary person
    credits himself for his success. But once a person reaches a point
    where he recognizes that he does not owe his good fortune to his
    own Tzidkes, his own merit, he can easily come to ascribe it to
    supernatural causes.

    Nechush is forbidden because of its demoralizing effect. For once we
    begin to believe that we can promote our own good fortune by means
    other than doing what is right and good, and that we have other things
    to fear besides doing evil, we are in real danger of corrupting our
    actions. Because of nechush we will neglect to do good, and because
    of reliance on nechush we will do evil. We will no longer measure
    our actions by the standard of Gods Torah; we will cease to do our
    duty, because we will then believe that we have found another way
    of attaining our objectives.

Personally, I wonder how this relates, if at all, to reliance on Segulos
in light of the following comments from The Mezhbuzher Rav, Harav Avraham
Yehoshua Heshel Bick, shlita:

    [Segulos] are nothing more than bubbe maasos, eitzas yetzer hara
    that give people a license to spend money way beyond their means
    and then ask for a yeshuah. All these formulae saying Shir Hashirim
    forty times, Tehillim HaChida, etc. are methods used by the yetzer
    hara to take from us the little [spirituality] we have left.

    Prayer, on the other hand, is not a segulah; prayer is a way of
    communicating with the Ribbono shel Olam. When we use segulos to
    get what we want, its as if we are stealing something from Him,
    something that is not rightfully ours. It reminds me of todays Chinese
    auctions at charitable events. Whereas women used to give charity
    without ulterior motives, they have now replaced their mitzvos with
    Chinese auctions.

(This is taken from an article that appeared in the Hamodia Magazine that
I have posted at http://www.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/hamodia/segulos.pdf .



Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2009 18:25:14 -0500
Subject: What is True Rachamim?

What indeed is true rachamim and what is its source? RSRH writes the
following on Bereshis 43

        14 May the All-sufficing God grant you compassion [Rachamim]
        before the man, so that he may let your other brother and
        Binyamin go. As for me, if I must be bereaved of me children,
        then I will be bereaved.

    Rachamim denotes the attribute of Gods love for His creatures, which
    is most general and will never be lost. The attribute of Rachamim
    should also be the guiding principle in human relations. Rachamim is
    love of family, love of parents for their children, love of children
    for one another because of the one Rechem from which they came forth.

    People tend to confuse Rachamim with the popular expression Rachmonis
    and take the attribute of Rachamim to be pity. Pity, however, is of
    a much lower level than that of true Rachamim.

    Which is rarer, which is nobler: sharing in others pain or sharing
    in others joy? Very few people do not feel pain at the suffering of
    their fellow men. But this is certain: not all those who today share
    in a poor mans pain will rejoice to the same degree if overnight he
    becomes rich, and tomorrow passes them in the street, riding with
    his family in an elegant carriage.

    Rachamim, the attribute by which our nation is distinguished
    (Yevamos 79a), means more than pity. Rachamim stems from Rechem,
    which denotes the most intense and self-sacrificing investment
    of energy by one being for the formation and emergence of another
    being; the commitment of all of ones blood and energy for the sake
    of another beings formation and completion. Rechem, the womb, is
    the hearth of the deepest devotion. Afterward, too, when the new
    being has been completed, the Rechem this deepest devotion effects
    not only sympathy with the babys crying but even more intimate joy
    with its smiling. A smile of a baby on the lap of its mother makes
    up for years of worry and sleepless nights.
    From Rechem derives the attribute of Rechamim. This attribute not
    only suffers when the other suffers, but knows no rest until it sees
    him happy.



Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2009 10:56:39 -0500
Subject: Aggadata Was "Originated" by Later Generations

The following is from RSRH's commentary on Bereishis 43
        12 And take double [mishneh] money in your hand, and bring back
        with you the money that was returned at the top of your sacks
        perhaps it was an oversight.

    Shana itself, however, denotes what is different in its individuality,
    the repetition of the same phenomenon, repeated in another individual.
    Thus, from the very word shana by which the Sages of the Mishnah
    designated their teachings of the law we learn that they merely handed
    down what had come down to them by way of tradition; they merely
    repeated what they had heard and received. Thus also shmeittata,
    that which has been heard, as opposed to aggadata, that which is
    original, self-produced. shana does also occur, though, in the sense
    of contrast: to change oneself.

RSRH is telling us that Aggadata is not something that was passed on
like mishnah. It was "originated" by later generations. Indeed, he says
in his essay Limitations of Agadah (Please see
http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/hirschAgadaEnglish.pdf and
http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/hirschAgadaHebrew.pdf )

Agadah Is Not Rooted in Transmission

I think this stands to reason, first of all, because all agadic statements
are not rooted in the transmission from Sinai that forms the basis of the
"Na'aseh venishma" covenant; they are rather the personal ideas of the
maker of the individual statement.

Yitzchok Levine


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 26, Issue 258
***************************************

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..."