Avodah Mailing List

Volume 27: Number 71

Sun, 14 Mar 2010

• 1. Re: motzei pesach (Zev Sero)
• 2. Re: R' H Schachter-kashrut (Yitzchak Schaffer)
• 3. Re: Is Lox Kosher? (kennethgmil...@juno.com)
• 4. R Schacter - kashrut (Eli Turkel)
• 5. Re: R' H Schachter-kashrut (rabbirichwol...@gmail.com)
• 6. Re: Fresh Challah for Yom Tov (was is Lox kosher) (Isaac Balbin)
• 7. Re: R' H Schachter-kashrut (Rich, Joel)
• 8. Ran and Kabbalah - seeking sources (rabbirichwol...@gmail.com)
• 9. R Schachter - kashrut (Eli Turkel)
• 10. Re: (Avodah) Who First Said it? (D&E-H Bannett)
• 11. Re: timtum halev (Micha Berger)
• 12. Re: Ran and Kabbalah - seeking sources (David Riceman)
• 13. Timtum Halev (Beth & David Cohen)
• 14. Re: timtum halev (David Riceman)
• 15. Is Lox Kosher? (Beth & David Cohen)
• 16. questions re Mizbeach Adamah and walls of Mishkan (T6...@aol.com)
• 17. Selling bourbon before pesach (Akiva Blum)
• 18. Re: Selling bourbon before pesach (Ben Waxman)
• 19. Re: Selling bourbon before pesach (Liron Kopinsky)

Saul.Z.New...@kp.org wrote:
> 
> so if the israeli gets on the plane motzei pesach and  eats the  chametz 
>   meal  , is he  chayav  kares?

What's your scenario?  A concorde?  Without one how can he fly from
the 8th day into the 7th day?  With one you have the same question
every Shabbos, don't you?

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

On 3/11/2010 13:14, rabbirichwol...@gmail.com wrote:
> RY Schaeffer said
>> "if there are any bugs, they've disintegrated" is somehow involved.
>> I don't know if that's the only factor in that case, but it. was cited.
>
> There is a big hiluq between definite issur and suspected [safeiq] issur.
>
> AIUI bittul l'chathcilah for s'feiq issur is muttar.

Ah.  That I didn't know.

> Also - as above - the bugs are not a listed, desired ingredient. So
> Agencies are not concerned about giving their blessings to bugs. They
> are like "davar she'ino miskavein."

I was interpreting the RHS reference "all ingredients are kosher/no 
bittul etc." to mean all contents, rather than listed ingredients as you 
have read it.  Or perhaps this was picking up context from a specific 
point folks here were discussing, and I haven't been following that?  R' 
Joel Rich, can you clarify?

Thanks!

-- 
Yitzchak Schaffer
Systems Manager
Touro College Libraries
33 West 23rd Street
New York, NY 10010
Tel (212) 463-0400 x5230
Fax (212) 627-3197
Email yitzchak.schaf...@tourolib.org

Access Problems? Contact systems.libr...@touro.edu

R' Rich Wolpoe wrote:
> Today the local baker came in to where I work. He tole me that
> they close a full week before Passover.
> I asked - what about Hallah for the last Shabbos - IE Shabbos
> Hagadol?
> He said - Let them eat frozen Hallah.
> I said - it's not as good [basing myself on the halachah that
> allows fresh baked Bread on YT ]
> He said it IS just as good. [T'imas kefeilah?]
> -------------------------
> Assuming the baker is correct - would that now imply that baking
> Hallah on YT is no longer permitted? Being that since we now can
> get just as good Hallah by using frozen?
> And if it's still muttar - Why?

"Why?" - That's an excellent question.

And it is a question that you should ask to the baker, not to us.

From what I can see of this story, you asked the baked what to do on
Shabbos Hagadol, but you did NOT ask him why he is closing. Maybe he wants
time to clean and kasher his home. Maybe he simply wants some vacation
time. Maybe a relative is due to give birth around then.

Your post presumes that he is doing it for some misguided pseudo-halachic reason, but who knows?

Or maybe there is something hidden between the lines of this story and I missed it, as I so frequently do. Please show me.

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
Nutrition
Improve your career health. Click now to study nutrition!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2131/c?cp=G4JQGk0HBN99cQavhKtzGAAAJ
z3zeK-F0bLcqGb51B0rOTOKAAYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAASQwAAAAA=

> 2. Hechsher means all ingredients are kosher/ no bittul etc. because
> that's what people expect

RMF has a psak allowing ice creams thorugh bittul even though some
treif agents would be considered devar hamaamid

Many (most?) commercial ice creams in the US have some hechsher.
Are all these ice creams congealed today by kosher agents or are
they still relying on the heter of RMF which allows bittul of davar
hamaamid by a goy

-- 
Eli Turkel

yitzchak.schaf...@gmx.com 
>> There is a big hiluq between definite issur and suspected [safeiq] issur. 
>> AIUI bittul l'chathcilah for s'feiq issur is muttar. 
 
> Ah. That I didn't know.?
 
Perhaps that's why the topic of Skfeiq s'feiqa is critical to mastering
"issur v'heter"

V'ein kan m'komo l'ha'arich.

I don't know whether or not this factor is part of RMF's "snif l'haqeil"
WRT ice cream.

So let's say ingredient X is not 100% treif but might be 50% Of the time
and it's batteil

Its use might be 100% muttar l'chatchilah, and it's listing on the
ingredients MIGHT not raise eyebrows, so Agencies could be comfortable
with it

Mashe eino kein with a vaday treif ingredient.
 
 
Sometimes one needs a s'micha style education just to properly understand
Shu"t and g'dolim and even that's no guarantee....
 
ZP 
RRW 
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

> 
> From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
> Assuming the baker is correct - would that now imply that baking Hallah
>> on YT is no longer permitted? Being that since we now can get just as
>> good Hallah by using frozen?
> 
> No.  There's nothing as good as *fresh* baked bread.  But frozen bread
> is just as good as yesterday-baked bread.  Time in the freezer doesn't
> count (or counts so little, over the course of a week, that it's de
> minimis).

It's as least as Shaveh L'chol Nefesh to have fresh food as the Ksav
Sofer's hetter for smoking which people seem to use on Yom Tov because they
still think it's Shaveh L'chol Nefesh (you know, it's healthy and calms the
nerves)
In reality, smoking can be thought of as Shaveh L'Chol Nefesh for SMOKERS. 

Fresh Challah is the same for those with a discerning palate or decent Challah shops (in Melbourne, our Challas are wonderful)
Is it Assur for someone who hates using warm water to warm up water to wash their feet on yom tov?

If you can't taste the difference between frozen yoech that has been warmed
up versus fresh, then maybe the yoech isn't up to par and I might need to
invite you to have my wife's authentic poilishe yoech.

The bottom line is that (fresh tasty food) enhances simchas yom tov and anyway chodosh (sic) (freezers) are assur min hatorah :-)

Frozen warmed up meals are only muttar while you travel, and how often have you enjoyed one of those meals!
I admit, though, that after being in India for 2 weeks I get excited when they serve me a Hermolis meal on the plane :-)

Anyway, perhaps instead of Challah you can use two of those pre-packaged
petrified big fish balls/logs. I think there is enough bread in them to
render the Bracha Hamotzi :-) I'm just waiting for the heilige velt to
start putting 

"Hemishe Fish grown in the mikvah, free of parasitic worms"

PS. What I really miss on Pesach is (decent) schmaltz herring (not the horrible pink israeli variety)

My father won't have it because the Goyim in his town used to throw the bread crumbs into the rivers and lakes before pesach.

 

I was interpreting the RHS reference "all ingredients are kosher/no bittul
etc." to mean all contents, rather than listed ingredients as you have read
it.  Or perhaps this was picking up context from a specific point folks
here were discussing, and I haven't been following that?  R' 
Joel Rich, can you clarify?

Thanks!

--
Yitzchak Schaffer
============

I will be posting the link on Hirhurim when I get it, but I don't think R'HS was that specific.
KT
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.

It has been stated in the list  that the Ran was critical of Kabbalah.

Along these lines I also saw a snip on the internet stating to the effect
that the Ran was critical of Ramban for being too involved in Kabbalah.

Is there a firm Mar'eh Makom for this?

Good Shabbos
RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

> 2. Hechsher means all ingredients are kosher/ no bittul etc. because
> that's what people expect

RMF has a psak allowing ice creams thorugh bittul even though some
treif agents would be considered devar hamaamid

The source is : YD #2 :32






-- 
Eli Turkel

Re: zeikher/zekher

As an expert, Prof. Penkower has more nerve than I have

He is obviously right in trying to make his shul say it only 
once.

But, I'm not an expert and maintain the stupid radition by 
saying things the way I was taught as a youngster.

Facts do not confuse me.

David

Thanks to this discussion, I realized a blurriness in my earlier
position. Since I resolved my point of confusion (to my own satisfaction),
let me present my position from scratch now:

Kayadua, the Rambam was very heatedly against the treatment of a mezuzah
as an amulet, as an object that contains inherent power. Of course,
the Rambam's hashkafah isn't popular today, so I'm not sure how much
people would make of that point.

However, I think this attitude did carry through to general Litvisher
thought. I already posted the reference to NhC 1:6, which argues that the
physical can only impact the metaphysical through change to a human soul,
since it's only the human soul which unites all the forces across all
the worlds. In NhC 2:5 he relates this concept to the Rambam (MN 1:72,
definition of "shiur qomah") as well.

See also the Meshekh Chokhmah's discussion of Moshe's shattering the
luchos -- luchos without Kelal Yisrael serving HQBH are just a pair
of gems. (The following examples were taken from R' Elyakim Krumbein's
e-shiur at <http://vbm-torah.org/archive/modern/20modern.htm>.) Similarly,
in Shemos 19:13 he explains that the qedushas BHMQ was a consequence
of BY's avodah. And thus, what would normally kill an imperfect Kohein
Gadol did nothing to Titus and his prostitute when they defiled the
qodesh hadashim.

And according to the Meshekh Chokhmah (Shemos 12:21), this notion of
powerful objects is the root of paganism!

So I started wondering when the notion of "a mezuzah protects" became
commonplace among my fellow Litvaks (and among Yekkes). I think it traces
back to the LR's Mezuzah Campaign in the weeks before and during the Six
Day War, but I'm not sure. It would seem to be mid- or late-20th cent CE,
either way.

AISI, the point of causality is to make bechirah chafshi meaningful:
1- Rules of cause-and-effect allow for hester panim.
2- They also allow us to plan our actions or even engineer new ways of
   accomplishing more, and explain then they go awry. Without the
   ability to plan and adjust plants, how could we know what our choice
   is likely to accomplish for us?

But otherwise, causality would get in the way of the point -- that HQBH
created us to have someone to be meitiv. In principle, there is one grand
unified metaphyiscal theory -- anything that happens to us is to get us
from where we are to being everything we could be. To maximize that
hatavah. It is "only" because that tov includes being self-defining
beings betzelem E-lokim that complications like physics were created.

How does metaphysical causality serve that Ultimate Purpose? It neither
hides Yad Hashem from those who would otherwise be reduced to being a
puppet by their awarness of it. Nor can you plan around it.

As for my point of confusion, this does NOT mean that the mezuzah's
protection, or timtum haleiv MUST be onesh. Rather, that they must
reflect changes to the self, which then calls for HQBH to chart a new
path from where we are to where we could be.

Sekhar va'onesh is just one major component of getting us on a new
course, but not the only one. Thus "sekhar mitzvos behai alma leika".

This answers the following.

On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 01:29:58AM +0200, R' Tal Moshe Zwecker wrote:
...
: From: Moshe Feldman <moshe.feld...@gmail.com>
:> a) SA Y.D. 91:7: a Jewish baby technically is allowed to nurse from a
:> non-Jewess, but should not do so because of timtum ha'lev.

But if the people involved didn't know a Jew nursed form a nachriah,
this modified position would argue there is no timtum.

Similarly:
: b) Tzitz Eliezer 18:70 one is permitted to feed a sick person nonkosher
: food, but it is better to be mechalel Shabbos for him rather than to
: feed him nonkosher food because the latter is metamtem es halev.

However, the modified position isn't the only one. It could be that it
really is the issur, not being impact by awareness of "that upon which
the issur is usually chal".

And that appeard to be what RJRich reported on Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at
11:45am:
: R'HS spoke last night and mentioned 32 kashrut items we've discussed
: 1. No timtum halev if something is halachically kosher

The question about how to understand the SA on nursing babies is one for
RHS. I'm just using his statement as a datapoint about how non-chassidim
have generally viewed these things.

: Also, I think that this ties into the machlokes of whether rov causes
: issur to change into heter, or just is a hanhaga allowing us to eat
: the food. Nifka mina: if a piece of issur is mixed with two pieces of
: heter, is one person allowed to eat all three pieces? See discussion in
: Beis Yosef Y.D. 109 summarizing the views of Rosh (yes), Rashba (yes,
: but not together, just one after the other) and SeMaG--based on Tosfos
: (no, because then it is definite that he eat an issur). Ramo paskens
: that l'chatchila we are machmir.

The Rosh and Rashba clearly hold that it's issur cheilev, not cheilev
itself that would cause timtum. The Semag's statement doesn't prove he
disagrees; it proves he holds that bitul can be undone.

This is related to another one of my longer discussions... whether
halakhah applies to objective reality or the world as it can be and has
been perceived directly (without tools) by people.

The Maimonidean Qabbalah category [not an oxymoron, according to the
Leshem] on Aspaqlaria (my blog):
    http://www.aishdas.org/asp/category/qabbalah
The Perceivable, the Perceived, and Halakhah:
    http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2009/03/halakhah-phenomenology-1.shtml
    http://http//www.aishdas.org/asp/2009/04/halakhah-phenomenology
    -2.shtml
    http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2009/04/halakhah-and-phenomenology-3.shtml
    http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2009/04/halakhah-and-phenomenology-4.shtml

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             It is a glorious thing to be indifferent to
mi...@aishdas.org        suffering, but only to one's own suffering.
http://www.aishdas.org                 -Robert Lynd, writer (1879-1949)
Fax: (270) 514-1507

rabbirichwol...@gmail.com wrote:
> Along these lines I also saw a snip on the internet stating to the effect
> that the Ran was critical of Ramban for being too involved in Kabbalah.
>
> Is there a firm Mar'eh Makom for this?
>   
Tshuvos HaRivash #157.  If you have the M'chon Yerushalayim edition 
check out footnote 7.

David Riceman

I am having some difficulty in the way that the concept of timtum halev is
being portrayed. It is as is there is some kind of biochemical reaction
effecting a non-corporeal, spiritual entity, the human neshama. The
discussion has become bio-mechanistic, e.g.does the consumption of x amount
cause it, does bitul do away with it? etc. Where does the intent of the
actor come into play? If someone holds be down and forces me to eat a
kazayit of treif, does that cause timtum halev, while if I voluntarily
consume a minuscule amount it doesn't?

I would think that maybe the timtum caused by inadvertent consumption (or
inadvertent failure to perform a particular mitzva correctly, such as
wearing tefilin you didn't know where not kosher) is the fact that the
person did not care enough to be careful enough, which, therefore causes a
chisaron in his neshama. In this way, one could at least argue that relying
on bitul is a permissive but not optimal way to behave, and, therefore can
still cause a timtum ( or conversely that it is perfectly legitimate and
causes no harm).

Just my 2 cents.
Shabbat shalom
David I. Cohen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100312/2c427371/attachment-0001.htm>

Micha Berger wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 12:42:33AM +0200, Tal Moshe Zwecker wrote:
> : As far as I understand it timtum halev means that one's insight and
> : intellect found in the heart are stuffed up and blocked up
>
> So, if I understand you correctly...
>
> 1- Timtum haleiv can occur even if someone followed hilkhos birur, but
>    happened to eat food that was lemaaseh treif.
> 2- Timrum haleiv refers to processes that impact one's bechirah.
>
> Don't you see my problem with this?
>   
To follow RRW's paradigm, what early sources mention timtum halev? When 
is it first used in a halachic context?

David Riceman

RRW wrote:

"Assuming the baker is correct - would that now imply that baking Hallah
on YT is no longer permitted? Being that since we now can get just as
good Hallah by using frozen?
And if it's still muttar - Why?"

There is still a difference on hot freshly baked bread right from the oven
and bread baked early on the morning of erev Yom Tov. So even though there
may be no difference between frozen challah and challah baked erev YT, there
is certainly a qualitative difference between fresh home baked challah and
the older store bought. Baking on YT -- still mutar!.

Shabbat shalom
David I. Cohen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100312/ba4a8ce4/attachment-0001.htm>

from Vayakhel-Pekudei
 
I have three questions, maybe the learned chevrah here know the answers and 
 can save me doing further research
 
1.  How did they fill the Mizbeach , aka the Mizbeach Adamah,  with dirt?  
This mizbeach was hollow and was filled with dirt AIUI  only when they 
camped, presumably to make it more solid and stable.  But  how did they fill it?  
Picture a cardboard box, turned upside down, with  its open side lying face 
down on the ground.  Suppose you now wanted to  fill that box with sand.  
How would you do it?  You could turn it  right-side up to fill it, but when 
you turned it back over, a lot of the sand  would spill out.  You could punch 
holes in the bottom (which is now the  top), fill it that way and then plug 
or tape over the holes.  You could  make a mound of sand or mud in the size 
and shape of the box before placing the  box over it.  Which of these 
methods did they use, or is the correct answer  OTHER?  
 
 
2.  How did they hold the walls (sides) of the mizbeach  together?  Did 
they hammer the wooden sides together with hammers and  nails?  No nails are 
mentioned in the Chumash, but neither is any other  method.  Did they use 
glue? Did they notch the ends so that protruding  bits of wood on the end of one 
side fit into matching holes on the end of the  next side, like pegs in 
holes?  Other?
 
 
3.  When it came time to erect the mishkan, the slabs of wood were so  high 
and so heavy that Moshe Rabeinu couldn't manage to get the walls up, so a  
miracle occurred (says Rashi) and the walls stood up by themselves.  Was  
this a one-time miracle in Moshe's honor?  Why did he have to do it  himself, 
anyway?  Why not get several men together to put the walls  up?  And can we 
assume that whenever they took apart the mishkan and put it  back together 
during their travels in the desert (other than that first time),  the job was 
done by groups of men rather than a single man?  Or do we  assume that a 
new miracle had to occur each time they camped, in order to erect  the mishkan 
in the new place?
 

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


--------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100314/cd5a0358/attachment-0001.htm>

Since bourbon must be legally at least 51% maize, is it considered chametz gamur that many will not sell over pesach, or is it a ta'arovoes?

(or, Do I have to finish that bottle of bourbon?)

Akiva

The psak I got last year was that it does not have to be sold at all.
However, if you really want a qula, ask me about the psak that I got about
whiskey.

Ben
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Akiva Blum" <yda...@gmail.com>

> Since bourbon must be legally at least 51% maize, is it considered chametz
gamur that many will not sell over pesach, or is it a ta'arovoes?

This Shabbat Rabbi Revah in LA spoke a little about chametz gamur and he
said that whiskey too is chametz gamur but that many people still rely on
the Chasam Sofer and sell it because of the large hefsed.

He didn't mention anything about whiskey not being chametz gamur, so it
would seem that there would be no difference between whiskey and bourbon
then, as whiskey isn't necessarily 50% grain.

On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 7:41 AM, Akiva Blum <yda...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Since bourbon must be legally at least 51% maize, is it considered chametz
> gamur that many will not sell over pesach, or is it a ta'arovoes?
>
> (or, Do I have to finish that bottle of bourbon?)
>
> Akiva
>
> _______________________________________________
> Avodah mailing list
> Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
> http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20100314/a641d9f5/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 71
**************************************

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..."