Avodah Mailing List

Volume 27: Number 95

Fri, 09 Apr 2010

• 1. Re: Volunteers? (Micha Berger)
• 2. Re: Chessed shebigvura (rabbirichwol...@gmail.com)
• 3. Re: Volunteers? (David Riceman)
• 4. Re: Volunteers? (David Riceman)
• 5. Haleiv HaCompanies (rabbirichwol...@gmail.com)
• 6. Who First Said It? 7 - Mourning during Sefirah (rabbirichwolpoe@gmail.com)
• 7. Re: Who First Said It? 7 - Mourning during Sefirah (Micha Berger)
• 8. Re: Who First Said It? 7 - Mourning during Sefirah (Ben Waxman)
• 9. Re: Who First Said It? 7 - Mourning during Sefirah (rabbirichwolpoe@gmail.com)
• 10. Re: Haleiv HaCompanies (Zev Sero)
• 11. Re: Who First Said It? 7 - Mourning during Sefirah (Zev Sero)
• 12. Re: Haleiv HaCompanies (Micha Berger)
• 13. Re: Who First Said It? 7 - Mourning during Sefirah (Micha Berger)
• 14. Re: Haleiv HaCompanies (rabbirichwol...@gmail.com)
• 15. Returning Taut akum (Rich, Joel)
• 16. Re: Who First Said It? 7 - Mourning during Sefirah (Zev Sero)

On Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 04:26:02PM -0400, Rich, Joel wrote:
:       and that HKB"H would be equally happy with this result?

Hevei zehir kemitzvah kalah kevachamurah (as I already quoted).

We don't know secharan shel mitzvos. Your question is unanswerable.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

RRW
: The simple answer is EG not giving money as tzedakkah to an
: Alcoholic Panhandler

Micha
> The point of the question is not the simple answer, but to spend the day
> looking for situations where this truth holds, where I did or did not
> live up to the idea.

I understand 
I was illustrating a case that would make it better understandable

The common denominator is to use g'vura so as to prevent chessed from
committing a form of co-dependent enabling

EG a parent doing the kid's homework.

It's all the same call it "tough love" or whatever it's about doing
chessed by withholding

Chessed shebigvura implies that when meting our din one applies it with
chessed/rachamim

EG how the Talmud aministers lashes by limiting it via v'niqlah achicha
b'einaecha etc. Thus we mete out punishment [g'vurah] w/o fury. That
is Chessed within g'vura. Unlike say the Egyptians who meted out tasks
davka to make then onerous [b'pharech]

G'vura within Chessed means we are meting out kindness albeit it is
manifest by witholding something that might enable or cripple the
recipient - as illustrated.

KT
RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

Rich, Joel wrote:
> So you are saying if one is learning and sees a person in need of
> assistance unloading his donkey, he may stop learning to do it even
> though there is another individual equidistant who was staring off
> into space and day dreaming and is now moving towards the donkey to
> assist?
> <snip>
> Oops- and that HKB"H would be equally happy with this result?
>   
I once asked one of my rebbeim how one can be obligated to perform 
lifnim m'shuras hadin.  His reply was that you can't be obligated at any 
particular event, but that if you never do it (and now, many years 
later, I'll add, if you don't do it regularly) you have failed in your 
obligation.

Does that help?

David Riceman

Rich, Joel wrote:
> I'm not sure I understand the ordered/different/commensurable
> distinction so let me restate- which one makes HKB"H "happier" or is
> he equally happy (e.g. Mordechai leaving learning to save the Jews)?
>   
Let me try a mashal hedyot.  Watching the Marx Brothers makes me happy, 
and watching the Smothers Brothers makes me happy, but I'm happier 
having watched both sets of brothers than I would have been devoting my 
time exclusively to watching one set of brothers.

David Riceman

> According to Halacha, milk requires supervision to ensure that it is
> produced exclusively from Kosher beasts.

> According to some, this supervision need not be performed by a
> Jew. Government regulations that are properly audited and maintained
> are adequate.

Permit me to explain the mechanics of RMF's p'saq re: Haleiv HaCompanies,
AIUI.

The Gmara says that a Jew need not witness the milking, rather if he is
in the area this causes the Gentile to be "mirsas"

Essentially RMF says that the USDA is a proxy for this "Jew in the
vicinity" and triggers the same "mirsas" via "anan sahadi". [I'm fuzzy
what the specific dynamics of this anan sahadi are about]

NB: the Gmara itself opened this door by NOT requiring the physical
witnessing by the Jew of the Milking process - and instead requiring a
[Jewish] presence to prevent "cheating".

In a country where the Gentile would not be mirsas* - then a Jewish
presence would indeed be required

* Due to, EG, either:
  - no government agency, or
  - an ineffectual one.

I hope this helps

RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

Plz Post:

The Talmud does record that Talmidei R Akiva perished during Sefirah

However,  AFAIK the Talmud does NOT prescribe any mourning rituals to commemorate this tragedy.

So - Who First Said It?

What is the earliest source for observing Mourning during Sefira?

KT
RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 05:29:03PM +0000, rabbirichwol...@gmail.com wrote:
: What is the earliest source for observing Mourning during Sefira?

See the first se'ifim on the subject in the AhS -- 493:1-3. In our
chaver R Dovi Jacob's critical edition, it's at
http://he.wikisource.org/wiki/%D7%A2%D7%A8%D7%95%D7%9A_%D
7%94%D7%A9%D7%95%D7%9C%D7%97%D7%9F_%D7%90%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%97_%D7%97%D7%99%D7
%99%D7%9D_%D7%AA%D7%A6%D7%92
or http://bit.ly/daTKRm

Leshitaso, the ban on getting married during omer bgecause of the death
of R Aqiva's talmidim is a minhag kol yisrael miymos hage'onim. A more
full aveilus he said is "bemedinos eilu".

I would suggest they grew out of the Crusades, which took such a toll
during the late omer, which is why the growth of the minhag is later
and more limited in population. The AhS's "medinos eilu" includes the
people who fled the Crusades and went east; in contrast to "kol Yisrael"
which goes well beyond Ashkenaz. (I don't know which part of the omer
the 2nd Crusades reached Ashkenaz, but that was during the omer as well.)

And, while I'm conjecturing, I think this is also the reason for diverse
minhagim about which part of the omer to mourn -- R' Aqiva's talimidim
stopped dying for Lag baOmer, but the Crusades hit Shair, Worms and
Magenca later in the omer.


Aside from both of the above, there is another reason to mourn during
omer. It's the only special time WRT avodah in the beis hamiqdash on
which aveilus is mutar. We lost that chagiga and the pesach, but we
are not permitted to mourn then. However, we also lost the qorban omer,
and being able to be maqdish our grain before eating any chadash...

And then what happened? We lost the BHMQ to sin'as chinam. Things improved
when many of us saw hope in Bar Kochva. Meanwhile, the next generation of
the religious elite were marked with the same flaw -- shelo nahagu kavod
zeh lazeh! This is while survivors of churban bayis, including their
rebbe, still walked the earth. And because we didn't learn, we nearly
lose the entire chain of mesorah; the rebuilding of Torah falls to 5
men. And we lose the hope of yet again returning to the qorban ha'omer...

The loss of the omer and the loss of talmidei Rabbi Aqiva are indivisible
parts of a single tragedy.

Again and again, we start rebuilding the world, and Hashem found our
foundations faulty and forced us to begin again.

Kol dor shelo nivneh beyamav ma'alin alav ke'ilu hu hecherivo.
                            - Y-mi Yuma 1:1, 5a

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 9th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            most appropriate?

Proffesor Sperber cites the tshuvot of the gaonim that one does not marry
between Pesach and Shavuot. Also they did not work at night until the next
morning.  Professor Sperber then quotes Rav Avraham ben Rav Natan HaYerchi
that the custom has changed to allow marriage after Lg B'Omer.

Ben
----- Original Message ----- 
From: <rabbirichwol...@gmail.com>

>
> Plz Post:
>
> The Talmud does record that Talmidei R Akiva perished during Sefirah
>
> However,  AFAIK the Talmud does NOT prescribe any mourning rituals to
commemorate this tragedy.
>
> So - Who First Said It?

ben1...@zahav.net.il
> Professor Sperber cites the tshuvot of the gaonim that one does not
> marry between Pesach and Shavuot. Also they did not work at night until
> the next morning. Professor Sperber then quotes Rav Avraham ben Rav Natan
> HaYerchi that the custom has changed to allow marriage after Lag B'Omer.

A few quick points

What situations have the following factors
    - Limited M'lacha
    - Issur Taspores
    - Issur Nisuin?

While there are perhaps a number of valid answers Moed Qatan has two
that primarily fits our bill viz.
    Chol HaMoed, and
    Aveilus

This is a hint to my sheeta on how this may have developed and evolved
over time

I concur with Micha that this is Gaonic. I also suspect that Professor
Sperber is on the right track here.

Add to this the not-so-popular sheeta of the Arizal that all 49 days
are assur b'taspores and maybe we can restruct the history a bit

Before I post my hypothesis I would like to check out a Ramban on Humash
that may help to connect the dots for us.

KT
RRW  
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

rabbirichwol...@gmail.com wrote:
> Permit me to explain the mechanics of RMF's p'saq re: Haleiv HaCompanies,
> AIUI.
> The Gmara says that a Jew need not witness the milking, rather if he is
> in the area this causes the Gentile to be "mirsas"

> Essentially RMF says that the USDA is a proxy for this "Jew in the
> vicinity" and triggers the same "mirsas" via "anan sahadi". [I'm fuzzy
> what the specific dynamics of this anan sahadi are about]

Sorry, this misstates the IM's position. Neither the USDA nor any
government agency is a proxy for a Jewish witness. Nor does he rely
on some leniency of a Jew merely having to be in the vicinity. Rather,
his position in the original teshuvah is that "anan sahadi" is a full
eidus *for all purposes*. His proof is from the witnesses for kiddushei
biah, who need not physically witness the act in order to testify that it
happened, and thus condemn the woman and her subsequent lover to death.
From this he derives a rule that certainty is just as good as physically
seeing something. Therefore, since (he says) the commercial realities
are such that we can be certain there is no more than 1/60 of tamei
milk in the container, we are the witnesses who "saw" it being milked,
even though we weren't physically present.

He later establishes that the "yisrael ro'ehu" is not really required at
the milking at all, but rather during the entire period that the milk
was in the possession of the *last* nochri to own it.  (In most cases
that would be the supermarket, and we can be certain that the milk was
not adulterated while it was in the supermarket's possession because
it's in a tamper-proof container; but RMF completely ignores this,
perhaps because he wants to cover the case of a Jewish-owned retailer.
So) he assumes that the last nochri to possess the milk was the plant
where it was processed; and he says we can be certain the milk was not
tampered with while it was there, because too many people would have
to be paid off, and there is nobody who would profit enough by it to
justify that.




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

rabbirichwol...@gmail.com wrote:

> Add to this the not-so-popular sheeta of the Arizal that all 49 days
> are assur b'taspores and maybe we can restruct the history a bit

Not all 49 days, just the first 48.   The Ari holds that one should
davka cut ones hair on the 49th day, after having grown it since before
Pesach.  I think he even allows a haircut on the 48th day if the 49th is
Shabbos.

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

On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 3:07pm EDT, Zev Sero wrote:
: >Essentially RMF says that the USDA is a proxy for this "Jew in the
: >vicinity" and triggers the same "mirsas" via "anan sahadi". [I'm fuzzy
: >what the specific dynamics of this anan sahadi are about]

: Sorry, this misstates the IM's position....                    Rather,
: his position in the original teshuvah is that "anan sahadi" is a full
: eidus *for all purposes*....

I do not see where you disagree with RRW's obvious intent.

RMF treats Chalav Yisrael (CY) as a question of requiring birur, and thus
any form of birur is sufficient. The "Jew in the vicinity" (eid echad
neeman be'isurin) which gives CY its name is just one possible birur,
as is anan sahadi.

BTW, you note that you're writin of RMF's original teshuvah. I am not
convinced his position was constant over time.

However, if someone were choleiq, and held that CY was a gezeirah,
we would require supervision even if there were no chance of a problem.

It would seem to me that the same birur issue would arise lekhol hadei'os
if one was dealing with a mumar rather than a nakhri. Since he's a mumar,
he is just as likely to adulterate the milk. Since he's a Yehudi, he's
outside the possible gezeirah.

BTW, a co worker leaves CY milk in a screw-top bottle in a company
fringe. Tampering is far from evident. I asked him once if the bottle
remains CY after leaving it there unattended. He replied that he never
heard of chalav haneelam min haayin. But it does seem RMF was thinking in
those terms by speaking of identifying the situation up to and including
the last nachri owner.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 9th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            most appropriate?

On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 03:27:18PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
: rabbirichwol...@gmail.com wrote:
: >Add to this the not-so-popular sheeta of the Arizal that all 49 days
: >are assur b'taspores and maybe we can restruct the history a bit

: Not all 49 days, just the first 48.   The Ari holds that one should
: davka cut ones hair on the 49th day, after having grown it since before
: Pesach.  I think he even allows a haircut on the 48th day if the 49th is
: Shabbos.

This is a side-issue. The Ari holds that the aveilus that would issur
taspores applies all 49 days, it's "just" that hachanah for Yom Tov
overrides it.

Since RRW is discussing the growth of the minhag of aveilus (and
developing our awareness of the changes in practice since chazal in
general), neither the difference between 48 days and 49 nor that between
whether something overrides the aveilus on the last day would matter.

BTW, leveraging RAM's work, I applied some additions and differences in
how I read the sources to produce a table of 12 various minhagim at
http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2008/05/mourning-during-omer-2.shtml

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 9th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            most appropriate?

RRW
>> Essentially RMF says that the USDA is a proxy for this "Jew in the
>> vicinity" and triggers the same "mirsas"

Zev
> Sorry, this misstates the IM's position. Neither the USDA nor any
> government agency is a proxy for a Jewish witness.

I said the USDA was a proxy to trigger mirsas.
Micha's point is "birur", that RMF used anan sahadi to say we KNOW it
is cow's milk.

Similarly I'm saying just as talmud AZ 39b requires a Jew NOT to see
but to merely intimidate against cheating, that RMF is saying USDA is
a proxy for this Jew in that it intimidates the Gentile.

I'm not positive of my p'shat in RMF's t'shuva. Nevertheless I made no
mistatement at all because I qualified what I said via "AIUI" - this is
how I make sense of it.

KT
RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

Did anyone listen to a recent R' Reisman navi shiur  that mentioned this
topic. IUC he was asked how one could return it, isn't there an issue of lo
tchaneim- his answer iiuc (bshem R' Pam ) was that for tikun of one's
middot it was acceptable .  When I looked up the Beer Haagolah he referred
to it seemed that the reason was the kiddush hashem created(see ??? ?????
?"? ??' ??"? ??"? ??"? ??' ??"? ??? ????? ?????? ????"? ????"? ??? ??????
?? ????? ????? ??? ???? ????? ?"? ????? ???' ??? ???? ????? ????? ????
????"? ????? ???? ???? ??? ?????? ?????? ???? ????? ??????? ????? ?????
???"? ??? ?????? ????? ?????? ?????? ??? ????? ?????? ???? ???"? ??"? ??'
????"? ???? ??? ???? ??? ??????? ????? ????"? ???? ???? ???? ???????
??????? ?????? ???? ???????? ?"? ?"?. . )


While lemaaseh there may not be many practical differences in the
explanations, the shift in focus to me is jarring.. Did I mishear or am I
missing something else?

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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100409/f69623c5/attachment-0001.htm>

Micha Berger wrote:

> : Not all 49 days, just the first 48.   The Ari holds that one should
> : davka cut ones hair on the 49th day, after having grown it since before
> : Pesach.  I think he even allows a haircut on the 48th day if the 49th is
> : Shabbos.
> 
> This is a side-issue. The Ari holds that the aveilus that would issur
> taspores applies all 49 days, it's "just" that hachanah for Yom Tov
> overrides it.

The issue, according to the Ari, is not aveilus.  If it were, then it
would be suspended on Lag Ba'omer.

-- 
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 27, Issue 95
**************************************

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..."