Avodah Mailing List

Volume 28: Number 72

Fri, 06 May 2011

• 1. Re: what makes a minhag (Micha Berger)
• 2. Re: Binfol oyivkha al tismach? (Simon Montagu)
• 3. Re: our way of (roundabout) speaking (Elazar M. Teitz)
• 4. Re: Binfol oyivkha al tismach? (Zev Sero)
• 5. Re: If the rabbi did not actually sell the Chamets (kennethgmiller@juno.com)
• 6. Re: Question regarding "hoiche kedusha" (Micha Berger)
• 7. Re: Binfol oyivkha al tismach? (Akiva Blum)
• 8. Re: Binfol oyivkha al tismach? (Micha Berger)
• 9. Fwd: What's the source for calling People for an Aliya to the T (Danny Schoemann)
• 10. Zimun - 2 women with 1 man - permitted? (Shoshana L. Boublil)
• 11. Rabbi Binyomin Shlomo Hamburger - "Nusach HaSefira" (Prof. Levine)
• 12. Clarifying Why the Muscovy Duck is Kosher: A Factually Accurate Response (Prof. Levine)
• 13. Omer? Laomer? Baomer? Shehayom? Sefiras Haomer Debunked and Demystified (Prof. Levine)
• 14. Re: Omer? Laomer? Baomer? Shehayom? Sefiras Haomer Debunked and Demystified (T613K@aol.com)
• 15. Not saying Morid ha-Tal (Prof. Levine)
• 16. Re: Not saying Morid ha-Tal (Micha Berger)
• 17. onen erev pesach (Eli Turkel)
• 18. Re: Bittul of non-K food (Micha Berger)

On Tue, May 03, 2011 at 09:45:59AM -0700, Saul.Z.New...@kp.org wrote:
: the argument has long  been made  in certain circles  that   standing at 
: silent attention is not  a jewish minhag.   i wonder at what point  a 
: minhag becomes a  'jewish'minhag, since  it is now  a minhag of 
: approximately 4 million jews  on 2 specific days...

The Rambam, Mamrim 2:2, speaks of a BD that hinhigu minhag. It appears he
holds that a minhag must have rabbinic input. Might only require post-facto
justification by rabbinic logic; I suggested that as being the difference
between minhag and taqanah (taqanos are top-down, minhagim, grass roots
upward).

But whatever it is, if the practice isn't be sourced from the Torah by
one's poseqim, I don't think it's a minhag no matter how many Jews do it.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 14th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        2 weeks in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Malchus sheb'Gevurah: How does judgment reveal
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            G-d?

On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 2:30 PM, Zev Sero <z...@sero.name> wrote:

> On 3/05/2011 5:06 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
>
>  Well, presumably in connection to current events (archive readers:
>> this was posted shortly after bin Laden y"sh's death) R' Shmuel Herzfeld
>> posted the following translation of the Meshekh Chokhmah (Shemos 12:16,
>> "hineih") on Kol haRav blog
>>
>> http://kolharav.blogspot.com/2011/05/r-meir-
>> simcha-of-dvinsk-on-celebrating.html
>>
>
> And against this we have an explicit gemara that attributes this view
> to Haman Harasha, in a machlokes with Mordechai Hayehudi.
>
>
Lo kashe -- you have said before that in disputation with non-Jews one is
allowed to misrepresent the Torah in order to win the argument.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110503/ade41c34/attachment-0001.htm>

R. Micha Berger: 

>I would translate "im yitzeh H'" to "I want it to happen, and hope He does
>to." However, "be'ezras Hashem" is a statement of intent -- "I am going to
>try to do it, and I hope He allows me to succeed." There is a slight
>difference between realizing the difference between hope and bitachon and
realiting the difference between hishtadlus and success.

>E.g. Be"H we're going to the doctor tomorrow, iy"H they'll find a medicine
>for him then.

     Actually, as Yiddish is spoken, it is exactly the opposite.  When
     stating the intent to do something, one adds "im yirtze Hashem,"
     thereby indicating the awareness that man proposes, but G-d disposes. 
     When indicating the desire for an outcome, one says "b'ezras Hashem"
     or "mit G-tt's hilf," expressing the hope that He will bring about the
     desired outcome.
Thus, one would say "We're going to the doctor tomorrow, G-d willing; with G-d's help, hthe doctor will find the cure."

EMT

 

____________________________________________________________
Groupon.com Official Site
1 huge daily deal on the best stuff to do in your city. Try it today!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4dc08d8c889ec21c937st01vuc

On 3/05/2011 5:46 PM, Simon Montagu wrote:
> On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 2:30 PM, Zev Sero <z...@sero.name <mailto:z...@sero.name>> wrote:

>     And against this we have an explicit gemara that attributes this view
>     to Haman Harasha, in a machlokes with Mordechai Hayehudi.
>
>
> Lo kashe -- you have said before that in disputation with non-Jews one is allowed to misrepresent the Torah in order to win the argument.

1) This wasn't a disputation, Mordechai *acted* on his view.
2) "Hu eino sas aval acherim meisis" is certainly not in a disputation,
and it's also in Sanhedrin.

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

R' Meir Rabi wrote:

> ... In our case though there can be no Safek that the master
> of the Chamets has indeed truly divested the Chamets and truly
> believes that there is no Chamets which does not satisfy the
> requirements of Chazal. In other words Chazal do not require a
> state of Chamets, they require a state of mind, which in this
> case has been accomplished.

Unfortunately, the Shulchan Aruch and the Responsa are littered with cases
of people who thought that they had sold their chametz properly, only to
find that the chametz was not sold, and thereby became forbidden. One such
example is in the Mishneh Berurah 448:18 --

"If a Jew placed his chometz in the room of a friend who was selling his
chometz [to a non-Jew], he must tell this to his Jewish friend who is doing
the selling, and make him a shaliach for the sale. For if he just leaves it
there, without telling, [it will become] forbidden after Pesach, because
the Jew did not know to transfer it, and the non-Jew did not know to
acquire it."

This case sounds (to me) very much like the cases RMR has given. This Jew
intended for the chametz to be sold, and he even removed it from his home
and placed it in the room where his friend had the chametz that he was
selling. He did this with every intention of not being the owner of the
chametz for the duration of Pesach. But because he missed some details, it
did *not* get sold, and so he *was* the owner over Pesach, and the chamets
*did* become forbidden.

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
Penny Stock Jumping 3000%
Sign up to the #1 voted penny stock newsletter for free today!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4dc0bfb482d6d222c7dst06vuc

On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 11:27:28PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
> Lich'ora it's related to kedusha; why should a bracha in chazaras hashatz
> be any different from what it is in the silent ShE? ...

The use of LeDor vaDor is a compromise between two nusachos. Rather than
let the EY variant die altogether when we accepted siddur R' Amram Gaon,
we use it in Chazaras haShatz. (Similarly, Oseh [ha]Shalom at the end
of Birkhas Shalom and a number of other examples we discussed way back
in vol 6.)

The switch was not due to LeDor vaDor being written to continue the theme
of Qedushah. I therefore don't know if your assumptions about the rule
should hold or not. It might have been more arbitrary than that.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 15th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        2 weeks and 1 day in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Chesed sheb'Tifferes: What is the Chesed in
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            harmony?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: avodah-boun...@lists.aishdas.org [mailto:avodah-
> boun...@lists.aishdas.org] On Behalf Of Micha Berger
> Sent: Wednesday 04 May 2011 12:06 AM


> 
> My conclusion as to how to resolve "binfol oyivkha" and "vesheim
> resha'im yirqav" is to simply take them both literally. To repeat
> what I wrote July 2007:
>     It would seem that from the medrash, through Shibolei haLeqet, the
>     Beis Yoseif, the Taz, the Kaf haChaim and in modern times to R' Aharon
>     Kotler, RSZA and a yeish omeir of R' Elyashiv, the message is to
>     rejoice in one's yeshu'ah even while feeling pain over the human cost
>     necessary to bring it about. Simply -- feel both, even though they
>     conflict.
> 

> 
> Well, presumably in connection to current events (archive readers:
> this was posted shortly after bin Laden y"sh's death) R' Shmuel Herzfeld
> posted the following translation of the Meshekh Chokhmah (Shemos 12:16,
> "hineih") on Kol haRav blog
> http://kolharav.blogspot.com/2011/05/r-meir-simcha-of-dvinsk-on-
> celebrating.html
> 
>     
> 
>     
> 
>     But regarding the downfall of enemies there is no festival and
>     holiday for Israel.
> 
>     
> 
>     So too, with respect to the holiday of Purim: they did not make a
>     festival on the day that Haman died or on the day that they killed
>     their enemies, as this not a cause for rejoicing among His people
>     Israel. Instead, the holiday is only "on the days that they rested
>     from their enemies" (Esther 9:22). It is as though, they needed to
>     rest, and there were snakes on the path and the snakes were killed,
>     is it appropriate to rejoice on the day that the snakes were
>     killed? Their joy was from their relief.
> 
>     


> -----Original Message-----
> From: avodah-boun...@lists.aishdas.org [mailto:avodah-
> boun...@lists.aishdas.org] On Behalf Of Zev Sero
> Sent: Wednesday 04 May 2011 12:30 AM
> 
> And against this we have an explicit gemara that attributes this view
> to Haman Harasha, in a machlokes with Mordechai Hayehudi.  The same
> gemara also explicitly says "hu eino sas aval acheirim meisis".  That's
> a tough burden to overcome.



Perhaps the resolution is as I think the Meshech Chochma is actually saying.
One does, and should, rejoice at the relief and salvation from one's
enemies. However, it is a whole other thing to make a YT for future years on
the occasion of the downfall.
Hashem has no celebration at His destruction of His enemies - hu eino sas
aval acheirim meisis. Malachim have no part celebrating the destruction of
the Mitzriyim. But as Jews we say Hallel when it occurs. However future
generations cannot celebrate. Perhaps this is because the time itself has
not been formed into something joyous as there is also involved human
destruction, whereas at the time of the salvation, we celebrate our personal
feelings, which should be of gratitude. A YT marks an intrinsically joyous
time.

Akiva

An interesting perspective from R' Tzvi Freeman, over on Chabad.org
<http://www.chabad.org/library/article
_cdo/aid/1507393/jewish/Is-It-Okay-to-Celebrate-Bin-Ladens-Death.htm>
;
(or <http://bit.ly/iAdtqg>). He opens by noting the contrasting
pesuqim in Mishlei (binfol oyivkha vs. ba'avod resha'im) and continues:

    The Talmud mirrors the tension. We find: "When the wicked perish
    from the world, good comes to the world, as the verse states,
    'When the wicked perish, there is joyful song.'"[3]

    ... while in the same volume, the Talmud has already told us, "When
    the Egyptians were drowning in the Sea of Reeds, the angels wanted
    to sing. G-d said to them, 'The work of My hands is drowning in the
    sea, and you want to sing?'" [4]

    We aren't the first to note these paradoxes and more. Now is not the
    time to list every resolution suggested. Instead, let's get straight
    to the heart of the matter:
...
    Simple: Because they are "the work of My hands." For this, they are
    magnificent. And a terrible loss.

    As another prophet put it, "As I live, says the L-rd G-d, I do not
    wish for the death of the wicked, but for the wicked to repent of
    his way so that he may live." [5]

    For the same reason, Solomon tells you not to rejoice over the fall
    of your enemy. If that's the reason you are celebrating -- because he
    is your enemy, that you have been vindicated in a personal battle --
    then how are you better than him? His wickedness was self-serving,
    as is your joy.

    But to rejoice over the diminishment of evil in the world, that we
    have done something of our part to clean up the mess, that there
    has been justice -- what could be more noble?

    That, after all, was the sin of Bin Laden: He recognized G-d. He was
    a deeply religious man...
                                  The sin of Bin Laden was to refuse to
    recognize the divine image within every human being, to deny the
    value G-d Himself places upon "the work of My hands." To Bin Laden,
    this world was an ugly, dark place, constructed only so that it
    could be obliterated in some final apocalypse, and he was ready to
    help it on its way. With that sin, all his worship and religiosity
    was rendered decrepit evil.

    So there's the irony of it all, the depth and beauty that lies in
    the tension of our Torah: If we celebrate that Bin Laden was shot
    and killed, we are stooping to his realm of depravation. Yet if
    we don't celebrate the elimination of evil, we demonstrate that we
    simply don't care.

    We are not angels. An angel, when it sings, is filled with nothing
    but song. An angel, when it cries, is drowned in its own tears. We
    are human beings. We can sing joyfully and mourn both at once. We
    can hate the evil of a person, while appreciating that he is still
    the work of G-d's hands. In this way, the human being, not the angel,
    is the perfect vessel for the wisdom of Torah.

    Sources:
    See Maharsha on Sanhedrin 39b; Midrash Shmuel 4:22.

    FOOTNOTES
...
    3. Sanhedrin 113b.
    4. Sanhedrin 39b.
    5. Ezekiel 33:11.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 15th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        2 weeks and 1 day in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Chesed sheb'Tifferes: What is the Chesed in
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            harmony?

From: Aryeh Herzig <gurar...@gmail.com>

> The Shulchan HaTahor was written by Rabbi Eizik Safrin, the Komarno
> Rebbe four generations ago.
<snip>
> Shulchan HaTahor was published posthumously against the author's wishes.

Thank you.

I am still awaiting an answer to my first question:
>> This is because the Shoresh Neshama of every Jew is in the Torah
> 1. Could somebody elaborate / explain this to the laymen amongst us?

What does it mean that "the Shoresh Neshama of every Jew is in the
Torah" and how is that affected by being called up to an Aliya with
your name?

- Danny

Yonathan Gershon from Har Etzion Yeshiva wrote an article that proves that
within a family, it is definitely permitted.

A Rosh Yeshiva, Rabbi Gigi, approved the article and its proofs. Rabbi
Meidan doesn't agree with everything, but writes that his conclusions are
halachically correct.

http://www.bmj.org.il/akdama/34/m -  a   link to the synopsis.

An article about this, with some comments, appears in
http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-4048259,00.html

If someone has access to Akdamot, perhaps they can add some sources.

Shoshana L. Boublil

You may listen to this talk by clicking on 
http://torahway.org.uk/archive/mp3/17-05-2009.mp3

The latest issue of Hakirah contains the article
<http://www.hakirah.org/Vol%208%20ZelcerM.pdf> 
<http://www.hakirah.org/Vol%2011%20Zivotofsky.pdf>

    Clarifying Why the Muscovy Duck is Kosher: 
    A Factually Accurate Response 
    by Ari Z. Zivotofsky and Zohar Amar

    The authors detail the problems with and shortcomings of a Psak
    that said that Muscovy ducks are not kosher. In particular, this
    particular Psak is not, IMO after reading this article, based on
    fact. The article is well worth the read. It concludes with

    There is nothing new under the sun, and an analysis of the recent
    debate reveals that practically all of the arguments raised to
    prohibit it 100 years ago were raised again and that, "surprisingly"
    all of the century-old responses were ignored. Those seeking to
    prohibit the bird mobilized all tactics including utilized rumors,
    hearsay, suppression of facts, and simple lies.18 There is no question
    that the discussion of the kashrut of the Muscovy was not carried
    out as a legitimate halchik discussion, the facts were not verified
    or examined in depth and thus the process and the conclusion are
    invalid from the start. This is a reckless ruling that should never
    have seen the light of day and through it the honorable names of
    Torah scholars of earlier generations and the masses who ate the bird
    relying on the earlier ruling were besmirched. It is legitimate and
    understandable if one personally wants to refrain from eating Muscovy
    due to a questionable mesorah, the issue of force-feeding ducks,
    or any of a host of other reasons. But one may not, in the name of
    "chumra" or "frumkeit," misrepresent the truth, distort the Torah,
    and make the pure impure.

    Indeed, how many other piskei halacha have been issued that "in the
    name of 'chumra' or 'frumkeit,' misrepresent the truth, distort the
    Torah, and make the pure impure"?

Yitzchok Levine 

Please see http://tinyurl.com/3lmhvn5  YL

 
In a message dated 5/6/2011, llev...@stevens.edu writes:

Please  see http://tinyurl.com/3lmhvn5  YL






>>>>>
Lengthy essay about "ba'omer" vs "la'omer."
 
Reminds me of the discussion we once had here about "kol Yisrael  areivim 
zeh bazeh" or "zeh lazeh."
 
The conclusion was that both were correct and it didn't really make any  
difference.
 
 
I suspect that if you looked at closely related languages in Europe -- or  
even different speakers of the same language -- you would find some say "the 
 sixth day of May" and others "the sixth day in May" and although the  
prepositions vary, the meaning does not.
 

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





_____________________
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110506/33dc4bc5/attachment-0001.htm>

This morning after davening a fellow who davens Nusach Sefard  asked 
me why Nusach Ashkenaz does not say Morid ha-Tal.   I did not have an 
answer for him.  Can anyone help?

Yitzchok Levine 

On Fri, May 06, 2011 at 08:23:27AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote:
> This morning after davening a fellow who davens Nusach Sefard  asked me 
> why Nusach Ashkenaz does not say Morid ha-Tal.   I did not have an  
> answer for him.  Can anyone help?

The Tashbeitz reports that the Maharam miRutenburg announced "morid hatal"
at mussaf on Pesach because in EY they would say it in the summer.

Sounds like Nusach EY had "Morid hatal", Nusach Bavel does not. Since we
all daven variants of Sidur Rav Amram Gaon, the chiddush would be saying
"Morid hatal", not the omission.

Still, it's a reversal of the norm for Ashk to have the EY derived nusach,
and Seph to have the Bavli.

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 17th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        2 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Tifferes sheb'Tifferes: What is the ultimate
Fax: (270) 514-1507                              state of harmony?

Question (obviously not le-halacha). Happened to a friend and he asked 3
rabbis and got 3 answers

His father died the evening before Pesach and the funeral was in the
afternnon and so sat shiva only for
a short time.

He is also a bechor and the question was whether he had to fast,
with/without a siyum?

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110506/ff0d6d4f/attachment-0001.htm>

On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 12:45:50AM +1000, Meir Rabi wrote:
: HaRav Sh Z Auerbach Paskens that Chamets that is not Battel during Pesach
: (even in parts per thousand) IS in fact Battel when it is so dilute that it
: can not be discerned by human tasting.

: Does this not point towards a most remarkable observation - that if a non-K
: food flavour is transferred to a Kosher food, if it is not at all
: discernible by human tasting, then the food ought to be Kosher.

The topics of nosein taam and bitul beshishim are old ones. What's
remarkable in your extension?

I think it's more incredible that what you're telling us is that KLP uses
the usual rules after all! Despite the afilu 1:1000. Or did I misunderstand?

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 17th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        2 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Tifferes sheb'Tifferes: What is the ultimate
Fax: (270) 514-1507                              state of harmony?


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 28, Issue 72
**************************************

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..."