Avodah Mailing List

Volume 27: Number 30

Thu, 28 Jan 2010

• 1. R Yaakov Kamenetzky on davening in public (Yitzchok Levine)
• 2. Proposed New Sefer on Business Ethics (rabbirichwol...@gmail.com)
• 3. Re: The nature of the flow of Torah (Richard Wolpoe)
• 4. Re: re Coca cola ingredients (Richard Wolpoe)
• 5. Re: Two kinds of humros (Richard Wolpoe)
• 6. Re: R Yaakov Kamenetzky on davening in public (Samuel Svarc)
• 7. Coca Cola ingredients (martin brody)
• 8. Re: Coca Cola ingredients (Micha Berger)
• 9. FW: fishy worms - reponse from Y Spira (SBA)
• 10. Re: FW: fishy worms - response from Y Spira (Prof. Levine)
• 11. More on Worms in Fish (Prof. Levine)
• 12. Re: fishy worms - response from Y Spira (Prof. Levine)
• 13. halachic adventures & research links (Saul Guberman)
• 14. Re: Two kinds of humros (David Riceman)
• 15. Re: Looking for sources about Chazal's Ruach Hakodesh (David Riceman)
• 16. Nature meant us to be men of the fields and flocks. (Yitzchok Levine)

This was sent to me by Rabbi Dr. Daniel Z. Kramer. I think that it is 
well worth disseminating.  YL

"B'Mechitzas Rabbeinu" -Rabbi Yaakov Kamenetzky's hanhagos. See pages 58-59

Here's a loose translation by a friend:

"One student - whose livelihood required him to always be on the road 
- asked R' Yaakov what to do about davening Mincha when he was out on 
the road. R' Yaakov advised him to pull into a highway rest stop or 
parking lot, park his car, and daven the entire mincha while sitting 
inside his car. R' Yaakov emphasized that there was absolutely no 
reason in such a case to stand up and daven in public - or to do 
anything else that would arouse anyone's curiosity. After all, being 
the subject of everyone else's curious looks would surely detract 
from him ability to concentrate on his prayers.

He also emphasized that it was against halacha to stand outside and 
daven out in the open under the 'Kippas HaShamayim'. Lastly, he told 
him that although many try and solve this problem by going into an 
empty telephone booth to daven, this is pure gezeilah from the phone 
companies. After all, while one is in there davening mincha, he's 
preventing others from entering and paying to make their phone calls."

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100127/437fb3fa/attachment-0001.htm>

Today's climate cries out for just such a limud!

NishmaBlog: 
Proposed New Sefer on Business Ethics

http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/2010/01/proposed-new-sefer-on-
business-ethics.html

KT
RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 9:20 PM, Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org> wrote:

I think this is uniquely Rambam. As I already quoted a few times
> recently, the Rambam explicitly says he is breaking from someone --
> probably the Rif -- on this very issue. The standard approach, taken
> by the Rif and R' Avraham ben haRambam, aside from people not on either
> side of his chain of mesorah (eg Rashi) is that a the most relevent
> element of a tanna's statement is how it's developed by amora'im,
> which in turn is binding in terms of how it was understood by the
> geonim. The Rambam himself explicitly states that he used to do the
> same (following someone who isn't named; probably the Rif)
> but changed his mind before the Yad. For the rest of his life, the
> Rambam aspired to understand maamarim from a clean slate.
>
> But that's distinctly Rambam, not Andalusian in general.
>

I'm going to just say that the scope is too braod for an avodah discussion
because this approaches term paper scope.



>
>
> Personally, I think it all flows from his Aristotilian attitude toward
> the role of knowledge, and thus Truth. The Rambam sees ethical perfection
> as secondary, a side-effect of man's primary quest of yedi'ah.
>
>
I see your point, but I think this is not the exclusive reason for the
Rambam's Stance.


> And so it's unsurprising that he concluded that TSBP is something to be
> known, with a single Truth, rather than a redemptive process for
> creating law.
>
>
I think it's the Rambam's Mishnaic style that did not allow for shaqla
v'tarya.  I see this flowing from an authoritarian communal leader who
wanted no ambiguity.  IOW the Rambam mayhave known that Halacha was complex,
but wanted it simplified and unified for societal purposes.


> But I think he was a daas yachid, and it wasn't too long after that even
> the Andalusians were ripe for adhering to the SA, written by a mequbal
> no less, rather than the Yad.
>
> : It's top-down. Authoritarian.
> : More Sinai like
> :
> : EG You don't see a lot of "yeish omrims" in Mishnah Torah, because there
> : is ONE way.
> I think it's because the
> Rambam isn't about Authority -- that would be establishing law, not
> finding truth. "Qabel es ha'emes mimi she'omro" gives reason to defy
> authority in a quest for emes.
>
>
Philosophoicaly Rambam was more flexible.  But his Halachic audience was
IMHO a Kitzur SA audience that he was talking down to. Notice that Kitzur SA
himself used the Rambam;s style


> The reason why there is only ONE way is again because he is seeking
> truth. Law or technique could have multiple right answers. That is
> harder to say about Truth (particularly when you only have classic
> logics).
>
> Tir'u baTov!
> -Micha
>
>
I see the Rambam as being a highly authoritarian "law-giver" to the general
public and as much more sophisticated and nuanced with the Advanced Scholar.


The Rambam's Authoritarian manner is not limitted to lack of debate. He is
very much into imposing law [EG kofin oso ad she'omer rotzeh ani]  I realize
that this cannot be proven in
a single posting or 2. But I take this on the basis of several lectures I've
heard over the years. consider it an opinion of at least 3 scholars I know
and is not my da'as yachid

As far as SA overturning Rambam and The Rif Rambam split this is quite
paradoxical:

   1. SA saw himself as pasqening mostly like Rambam [See EG Choshen Mishpat
   25]
   2. Kessef Mishneh saw learning the Rif as the best way to find out how
   the Rambam arrived at his conclusions. It's in an early comment against the
   Raavad in the haqdamah. I"ve written short posts using that very technique.
   Certainly Kessef Mishna saw Rif and Rambam in "lock-step" for the most part

Micha is saying that Since Rambam is Aristotelian therefore he is single
minded and allows for no ambiguity

I'm ignorant of Aristotle and I know little philosophy.  But as an amateur
psychological point of view I MIGHT say this instead: Since the Rambam saw
Truth as unified and not gray, he chose to be Aristotelian, because it
dovetailed into his pre-existing disposition to see things as primarily
black-and-white.

Look at Maimoidean followers. Are they Aristotelian? maybe so maybe no.
Are they people who love to see the world in Black-and-white? Definitely
so.  Show me a Chossid of the Rambam's halachic style and I'll show you a
persona who needs to see things in black-and-white rigidity.

But I even conceded above, that this was how he treated the lower level. The
Rambam had another side that was more flexible, The sophisticated nuanced
side.  That persona is present in the Moreh [and shmonah p'raqim] and is the
"other" Rambam that RYDS referred to.

-- 
Shalom uVRacha
RabbiRichWol...@Gmail.com
see: http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nishma-Minhag/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100127/65b53014/attachment-0001.htm>

On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 3:11 PM, kennethgmil...@juno.com <
kennethgmil...@juno.com> wrote:

>
> I suspect that this is one of those things which cannot be answered Al
> Regel Achas. Rather, the answer requires a thorough study of Hilchos
> Taaruvos. Too many subjects are mixed together here. The ingredient was
> added deliberately, but by a non-Jew, so does it count as L'chatchila or
> B'diavad? And so on...
>
> Akiva Miller
>
> _
>

Here is a quick regel achas


   1. When a Nochri intentions puts in a non-kosher ingredient as part of
   the formula it's AIUI a real problem of bittul l"chatchila when it is an
   ongoing procedure etc.
   2. However, if a Nochri takes an existing  MIXTURE and intentionally Adds
   THAT, then - even if that mixture had a problematic ingredient -  it would
   NOT posea problem per se [unless the problem ingredient was really
   significant and noticeable.


Illustrations:


   1. Nochri intentionally adds butter for texture.  While the butter is
   otherwise battel, it must be treated as dariy [add if he uses lard instead,
   it is treif]
   2. Nochri adds a flavoring that contains many components, and one of them
   is grape flavor.  Since the nochri is NOT focused upon that individual
   componentbut upon the compound - that may indeed be boteil!

Summary:
AIUI I was issuing warnings about cases simliar to 1 and RAF was showing the
heterim in cases simlar to 2.
-- 
Shalom uVRacha
RabbiRichWol...@Gmail.com
see: http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nishma-Minhag/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100127/2f391ef0/attachment-0001.htm>

On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 10:08 AM, David Riceman <drice...@att.net> wrote:

> I'm studying Be'er HaGolah, and it reminds me of an old question.  Think of
> the gzeirah of einah bas yomah atu bas yomah as a typical humrah.  The cook
> is in the kitchen every day grabbing at pots.  One evening, cooking meat, he
> accidentally grabs the pot he used that very morning to cook dairy.  So the
> Rabbis required him to have separate dairy and meat pots to avoid this
> problem.
>
> David Riceman
>

A S'phardic Rabbi told me tonight that

   1.  this is NOT assur as per Hazal
   2. A poor person may l'chatchila use metal and glass for both [metal
   using nat bar nat]
   3. the Rema et al. came up with this policy

I countered with a long diatribe but I prefaced it with [a guzma] that 80%
of what we do is post-Talmudic anyway

If this Rav is incorrect WRT the pots - I'd like to know.


-- 
Shalom uVRacha
RabbiRichWol...@Gmail.com
see: http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nishma-Minhag/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100127/d65b6bb0/attachment-0001.htm>

On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 6:12 PM, Yitzchok Levine
<Larry.Lev...@stevens.edu> wrote:
> This was sent to me by Rabbi Dr. Daniel Z. Kramer. I think that it is well
> worth disseminating.? YL
>
> "B'Mechitzas Rabbeinu" -Rabbi Yaakov Kamenetzky's hanhagos. See pages 58-59
>
> Here's a loose translation by a friend:
>
> "One student - whose livelihood required him to always be on the road -
> asked R' Yaakov what to do about davening Mincha when he was out on the
> road. R' Yaakov advised him to pull into a highway rest stop or parking lot,
> park his car, and daven the entire mincha while sitting inside his car. R'
> Yaakov emphasized that there was absolutely no reason in such a case to
> stand up and daven in public - or to do anything else that would arouse
> anyone's curiosity. After all, being the subject of everyone else's curious
> looks would surely detract from him ability to concentrate on his prayers.

Agreed. Which is why I concluded in a previous email that it would be
better to daven on an airplane as opposed to in the airport. In fact,
R' Yakkov Kamentzky's son, R' Shmuel, told me that he "does this all
the time".

KT,
MSS

"What is the "shiur" of "being felt"? Suppose that instead of garlic powder,
there was a non-kosher ingredient used? Do we consider it batel unless the
taste-tester says, "I can taste the lard in this"? Or is it NOT batel unless
the taste-tester can't tell the difference?"

*The shiur is 1.6%. Chazal knew what they were doing. Very few tastes can be
identified below that level*





"The ingredient was added deliberately, but by a non-Jew, so does it count
as L'chatchila or B'diavad? And so on...

Akiva Miller"

*To you, the buyer/consumer, bdi'eved. It already happened, didn't it?
*
-- 
Martin Brody
310 474 1856
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100127/47c6259d/attachment-0001.htm>

On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 09:36:42PM -0800, martin brody wrote:
: [RAM:]
:>                                      Do we consider it batel unless the
:> taste-tester says, "I can taste the lard in this"? Or is it NOT batel unless
:> the taste-tester can't tell the difference?

: *The shiur is 1.6%. Chazal knew what they were doing. Very few tastes can be
: identified below that level*

Bitual beshishim is of anything that can't be detected neither by taste
(such as avidah lataamah -- things like spices that have a strong flavor
even in 1:60), nor a davar hamaamid (which changes texture), nor something
that is be'ein, nor anything else our senses can detect. (Nor a complete
beryah nor something that has chashivus. But that's less on-topic.)

Although the impossibility of bitul of a davar hamaamid is miderabbanan.

IOW, RAM is correct -- we require both indetectibility AND 1/60 -- it's
not that one is measured/estimated by the other. Bitul beshishim is an
additional din derabbanan, added lechumrah.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             A life of reaction is a life of slavery,
mi...@aishdas.org        intellectually and spiritually. One must
http://www.aishdas.org   fight for a life of action, not reaction.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            -Rita Mae Brown

From: Yitzchok Levine < >
Recently a document was posted about worms in fish that claims that most
fish contain worms, and therefore one should refrain from eating many kinds
of fish. See
http://www.jerusalemkoshernews.com/wp-content/uploads/mehadrinanisak
is.pdf
Note that no one has signed his name to this document.  Indeed, I know
nothing about Chevrah Mehadrin, Kashrus Advocacy of Rockland.

In addition, R. Yudel Shain has put a post at
http://yudelstake.blogspot.com/2008/12/fish-infested-with-worms-in
-flesh.htm
l
under the heading
<http://yudelstake.blogspot.com/2008/12/fish-infested-with-worms-in-
flesh.ht
ml>FISH
INFESTED WITH WORMS IN THE FLESH-including canned salmon
Given this, I contacted the OU to get some information about this issue.  I
have learned the following:

Rav Yisroel Belsky has issued a psak for the OU, stating that there is no
need to check for worms and no prohibition of the worms found in wild salmon
and other fish, in accordance with Shulchan Aruch  Y"D 84:16. According to
this psak, he states that the Shulchan Aruch does not limit the
permissibility of Tolayim found in the flesh of fish to any species of
tolaas. The halacha states that the tolaas found in the flesh of the fish is
mutar, and there is no reason to believe present day Tolayim are any
different from those found in the past.
====================================
From: Yechiel Spira [mailto:jerusale...@gmail.com] 

One expert who has been issuing documents about worm infestation in fish is
Rabbi Moshe Vaya of Jerusalem. I suggest before you run to discredit such
information, you probe the matter in greater depth. 

The same can be said for the Jerusalem-based Eida Chareidit, which has been
speaking of the 'fish problem' for some time. This is not new news, perhaps
in N. America it is, but not in Israel. 

You do not providing a service to your readers by seeking to discount the
legitimacy of the concerns in my opinion, but that is just my outlook and I
respect your option to disagree. 

There are more than a few mashgichim with whom I am in regular contact who
have confirmed the presence of the worms, and I have even seen them, quite
visible to the eye once one learns how to inspect. Yes, it does depend on
the source of the fish in many cases, but one cannot make a general
statement that there is no problem.

I also remind you that the audio presentation that you offer on behalf of
Rav Belsky Shlita is a year old. Much has changed in the past year as well. 

Respectfully,
Yechiel Spira
Jerusalem Kosher News

At 07:44 AM 1/28/2010, SBA wrote:
>I also remind you that the audio presentation that you offer on behalf of
>Rav Belsky Shlita is a year old. Much has changed in the past year as well.

For the record, Rav Belsky has recently confirmed his psak on this 
issue as Reb Seth knows all too well.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100128/83d2f971/attachment-0001.htm>

In response to the message below from  Yechiel Spira of 
http://www.jerusalemkoshernews.com/

Yechiel Spira [ mailto:jerusale...@gmail.com]

One expert who has been issuing documents about worm infestation in fish is
Rabbi Moshe Vaya of Jerusalem. I suggest before you run to discredit such
information, you probe the matter in greater depth.

The same can be said for the Jerusalem-based Eida Chareidit, which has been
speaking of the 'fish problem' for some time. This is not new news, perhaps
in N. America it is, but not in Israel.

You do not providing a service to your readers by seeking to discount the
legitimacy of the concerns in my opinion, but that is just my outlook and I
respect your option to disagree.

There are more than a few mashgichim with whom I am in regular contact who
have confirmed the presence of the worms, and I have even seen them, quite
visible to the eye once one learns how to inspect. Yes, it does depend on
the source of the fish in many cases, but one cannot make a general
statement that there is no problem.

I also remind you that the audio presentation that you offer on behalf of
Rav Belsky Shlita is a year old. Much has changed in the past year as well.

Respectfully,
Yechiel Spira
Jerusalem Kosher News

I replied,

For the record, Rav Yisroel Belsky confirmed his psak on this matter 
a few days ago.  So, while it is true that the audio presentation is 
a year old, his psak remains the same today as it was a year ago.

BTW, what are the changes that have occurred "in the past year'?

YL

Mr. Spira replied,

Thanks for the update regarding R' Belsky. This is important.

Here in the Holy Land however, as I wrote, the Eida and R' Vaya stand 
firm on the need for inspection.

Once again, the source of the fish is a major factor. Therefore what 
is true in Israel may not hold true in the USA and visa versa.

Yechiel

I in turn sent Mr. Spira the following:

Your statement, "Therefore what is true in Israel may not hold true 
in the USA and visa versa." is important to keep in mind.  IMO, those 
who reside in the US should be relying upon pesakim from US rabbonim.

However,  the document you referred people to at 
http://www.jerusalemkoshernews.com/wp-content/uploads/mehadrinanisak
is.pdf 
is not only not signed, but relies on Israeli rabbonim and makes no 
mention of the fact that what these Israeli rabbonim have said may 
not apply here in the US.   Nonetheless, you wrote at 
http://www.jerusalemkoshernews.com/

This 
<http://www.jerusalemkoshernews.com/wp-content/uploads/mehadrinanisak
is.pdf>link 
will take you to the document provided by Chevra Mehadrin in the USA 
regarding infestation in fish, quoting rabbonim in Israel. The names 
of the fish, place of origin and type of infestation, in the case of 
this chart, Anisakis.

It seems to me that in the public interest it would be wise for you 
to update this statement in light of what I have sent out and also in 
light of your statement, "Therefore what is true in Israel may not 
hold true in the USA and visa versa."  Not to do so, seems to me to 
be misleading people in the US.

And finally, what are the names of the people behind Chevra Mehadrin. 
Someone did a search in Monsey and came up only with a PO box!

YL


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100128/8b12acdc/attachment-0001.htm>

At 08:33 AM 1/28/2010, Mandel, Seth wrote:
>Since the worms we have today are the same worms they had 140 years 
>ago according to biologist and the documentation, that means that a 
>complete change in worm infestation occurred between 1560 and 
>1860.  One would have thunk that one of the Acharonim would have 
>mentioned this dramatic change and that fresh water fish are now asur.


Am I to conclude from this that those who say that these are new 
worms believe in evolution? >:-} Egad!!!!!

YL


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100128/465c536b/attachment-0001.htm>

See this site  http://halachicadventures.com of the "2 Ari's", Greenspan &
Zivotofsky.

Inyana D Yoma - an article on Quail & poison that they carry.
http://halachicadventures.com/?p=460

They have an excellent research link on the site
http://halachicadventures.com/?page_id=54
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100128/2446c554/attachment-0001.htm>

Richard Wolpoe wrote:
>
>    1. A poor person may l'chatchila use metal and glass for both
>       [metal using nat bar nat]
>
Nat bar nat works only if you boil all your food.  Sautee with either 
butter or fat would give the pot a gender.

David Riceman

Micha Berger wrote:
> You would be talking about
> someone who doesn't alternate hands three times when washing neigl vasr,
>   
Shabbos 109a "umakpedes ad shyirhotz yadav gimel p'amim".
> which he doesn't necessarily wash until right before Shacharis.
IIRC R Zalman Volozhiner (who did accept the authority of the Zohar) 
slept wearing mittens so that he could learn before washing his hands 
after waking.

David Riceman

In his essay The Fifteenth of Shevat (Collected Writings, Volume II) 
RSRH writes the following about Tu B'Shevat

For us the fifteenth of Shevat is only another calendar injunction, 
and its only significance in our Galuth-life is that there are some 
faint  traces of festivity in its synagogue service, and it may have 
some  bearing on the reckoning of the "Orlah" years.

All the same we will dwell a little on this fixture because it gives 
us the opportunity of looking somewhat more deeply into the spirit 
of  Judaism. And every such opportunity is welcome. For we suffer 
from  nothing so much as the lack of a correct and true knowledge of 
our own Jewish faith.

Hunted like wild animals, herded into ghettoes, driven into our 
humble homes or into the four modest walls where we could devote 
ourselves to religious contemplation, we seemed to the 
superficial  observer to be leading a joyless and unsociable life. We 
stepped into the public eye and showed signs of activity only in the 
market place  and in business and industrial life. But people did not 
look among the  Jews for a fresh pulsating life drawing strength and 
joy from the
breasts of Nature. The truth was that the Jew had been forcibly 
driven into this painful condition, and the Jewish spirit and the 
spirit of Judaism were blamed for       what was nothing but the 
fictitious product of brutal repression.

How utterly different is the spirit of Judaism where it can unfold 
itself freely! It transports us into the open country, where the 
brooks trickle and the meadows        bloom, where the seeds ripen 
and the trees blossom and the herds pasture, where man exercises his 
powers in close contact with nature and places 
his            exertions immediately under the protection and 
blessing of God. Nature meant us to be men of the fields and flocks. 
The Galuth has made us into wandering      traders. Oh, that we could 
turn our backs on this occupation which has been artificially imposed 
on us, that with our children we might flee away to 
the         simplicity of a country life infused with the Divine 
Jewish spirit! Then would simplicity and peace, temperance and love, 
humanity and joy, enthusiasm and      happiness dwell with us; 
David's harp would sound again and Ruth would again find the ears of 
corn on the field of Boaz.

It is wonderful how the Jew'sh law continually invites us to the 
observation of the laws and ways of Nature, and how it is ever 
leading us from Nature to the life        of man and there teaching 
us to use the products of the soil for bringing to ripeness the still 
nobler blossoms and fruits to a free human life permeated with 
the      idea of God.

YL
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20100128/25b04176/attachment.htm>

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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 27, Issue 30
**************************************

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..."