Avodah Mailing List

Volume 30: Number 18

Sun, 15 Apr 2012

• 1. Re: Gebrokts! (Zev Sero)
• 2. Re: RSZA on kitniyot (kennethgmil...@juno.com)
• 3. Re: Kama Maalot Tovot Lamakom Aleinu? (kennethgmil...@juno.com)
• 4. Re: Leading Charedi Posek Says metzitza' Should Not (kennethgmiller@juno.com)
• 5. Re: Leading Charedi Posek Says metzitza' Should Not (Micha Berger)
• 6. Fwd: Rabbi Hershel Schachter - True Freedom (Micha Berger)
• 7. Text for Bittul Chametz (kennethgmil...@juno.com)
• 8. What is Glatt? (Prof. Levine)
• 9. Re: What does "Redemption/Geulah" mean? (kennethgmil...@juno.com)
• 10. Stopped learning Nach? (was Re: What does "Redemption/Geulah" mean?) (Lisa Liel)
• 11. Re: Leading Charedi Posek Says metzitza' Should Not (Beth & David Cohen)
• 12. Re: Stopped learning Nach? (was Re: What does "Redemption/Geulah" mean?) (Micha Berger)
• 13. Re: Stopped learning Nach? (kennethgmil...@juno.com)
• 14. Transition From Aramaic To Hebrew (Jay F Shachter)
• 15. Re: Theoretical and Real Shiurim (D&E-H Bannett)
• 16. The 8th Day of Pesach in Golus (Prof. Levine)
• 17. Re: The 8th Day of Pesach in Golus (Micha Berger)
• 18. Re: What is Glatt? (Ben Waxman)

On 11/04/2012 12:41 PM, Prof. Levine wrote:
> So when did the Chassidim start it?  Reb Mendel of Vitebsk is cited by
> many of the early Chassidim as attributing it to the Maggid of Mezrich
> and that, believe it or not, *the Baal Shem Tov did eat Kneidlach*!

Of course he did; the concern did not exist in his time.  As the
Alter Rebbe writes explicitly in his teshuvah, previously the custom
had been to knead the dough for a long time, so one could be sure that
all the flour had been properly integrated into it.  It's only "these
past twenty years or more", after a new hiddur took on to hurry in the
preparation of matzos, that one must worry about flour not being
properly incorporated into the dough.

-- 
Zev Sero        "Natural resources are not finite in any meaningful
z...@sero.name    economic sense, mind-boggling though this assertion
                  may be. The stocks of them are not fixed but rather
                 are expanding through human ingenuity."
                                            - Julian Simon

R' Eli Turkel wrote:

> some psakim from RSZA
> 1. It wasn't clear to him what the halacha was for cottonseed
> oil and so he relied on the minhag not to use it.

This can be found in Halichos Shlomo, in the volume that covers Rosh Chodesh and from Pesach to Bein Ham'tzarim, section 4:17.

> 3. He was upset from people who made cakes etc from potato starch
> and certainly matzoh meal. He felt that this should be included
> in the kitniyot decree of being confused with chametz items

This is on the same page as above, note 28 in the Dvar Halacha section.

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
53 Year Old Mom Looks 33
The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4f85eaa4ac40d32df0ast01vuc

R' Liron Kopinsky asked an amazing question:

> In the Hagaddah, we go through the math of how many makkot there
> were in mitzrayim and at the yam suf. We say that since each
> maka in mitzrayim was an "etzba" and at the yam suf it was a
> "yad" that there were 5X as many plagues at the yam than in Egypt.
>
> This is fine except for the fact that we say "B'yad chazaka: zo
> hadever" (With a strong hand: this refers to the dever.) Why don't
> we say that dever counts as 5 times more than the other plagues?

Let's look at the pesukim. At first, I thought that RLK had used the same pasuk for different purposes, but no, we have two distinct pesukim here.

In Shemos 14:31, the Torah tells us that when we were at the Yam Suf, we
saw the "yad hagdolah - the great hand" which He put on the Egyptians.
Because just one of Hashem's fingers was responsible for all of the Ten
Plagues, the commonly accepted calculation shows that when we were at the
Sea, *each* of His five fingers must have made ten plagues, with a total of
50 plagues from His entire hand.

However, one can ask: Is the equation "one divine finger for each plague in
Egypt" valid? RLK has shown us that it is not. We see in Shemos 9:3 --
which is quoted in the Hagadah itself only a few paragraphs earlier!!! --
that Moshe told Par'oh, "Behold, the hand of Hashem is on your cattle!" It
seems clear that for this plague, Hashem's entire hand was on the cattle,
not just one finger.

At first, we thought that one of G-d's fingers was responsible for all ten
plagues. But we now see that this could be true for, at most, nine of the
ten plagues. The cattle plague was not done by a single finger, but by all
five fingers together. If so, then what happened at the sea? One
possibility is that the "great hand" which He used at the sea produced just
one plague, and it was as terrifying as the cattle plague. Another
possibility is that the entire hand produced 45 smaller plagues.

I'm not comfortable with either calculation. Instead, I am going to ask a question, similar to that of RLK:

In Shemos 8:15, Par'oh's chartumim said that the plague of lice was caused
by "the finger of G-d". The Hagada presumes that this "one plague to one
finger" ratio stays constant for all ten plagues. But the truth seems to be
that we know the ratio for lice and for cattle, but we know nothing about
the other eight.

I eagerly look forward to seeing other responses to this question.

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
53 Year Old Mom Looks 33
The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4f85f74813122334946st04vuc

Several posters are discussing whether metzitza is "an integral part of 
the mila" or not. I do not understand this discussion. Regardless of
whether it is an integral part of the milah, or whether it is a separate
mitzvah, it is pretty important either way, and those who would set it
aside for health reasons had better judge the matter very carefully.

Perhaps the real question is not "is it an integral part of the mila", but
to what extent it is truly required at all. In other words, perhaps the
real question is whether health considerations are the ONLY force behind
metzitza, or whether there are also other considerations.

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
53 Year Old Mom Looks 33
The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4f85e74e9ce1f32e085st02vuc

On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 08:17:36PM +0000, kennethgmil...@juno.com wrote:
: Several posters are discussing whether metzitza is "an integral part of
: the mila" or not. I do not understand this discussion. Regardless of
: whether it is an integral part of the milah, or whether it is a separate
: mitzvah...

The gemara says that metzitzah has health advantages. There are two ways
to read this: metzitzah is only for health reasons, or metzitzah is part
of beris milah, but happens to also have a health advantage.

No poseiq that I know of takes it as potentially a separate mitzvah,
aside from venishmartem me'od lenafshoseikhem. So, if it's not part
of beris milah, then it is no more binding than any other of chazal's
medical advice. And more so when it poses a real medical risk far
greater than any advantage gained through bloodletting.

:-)||ii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 4th day
mi...@aishdas.org        in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Netzach sheb'Chesed: When is Chesed an
Fax: (270) 514-1507                           imposition on others?

----- Forwarded message from TorahWeb <torah...@torahweb.org> -----
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 15:21:00 -- 0400
From: TorahWeb <torah...@torahweb.org>
Subject: Rabbi Hershel Schachter -- True Freedom
To: weekl...@torahweb2.org

Permanent Link <http://www.torahweb.org/torah/2012/moadim/rsch/pesach.html>

During intersession I participated in a special tour of Eretz Yisroel
together with a group of Yeshiva students. The purpose of the tour was
to study various aspects of Israeli society. Among many other places,
we visited a "charedi" yeshiva high school in Haifa. The rosh yeshiva
spoke with us and said, amongst other things, that if ninety percent of
his graduates do not end up learning long-term in a kollel, he considers
himself a failure. We were all stunned!

Certainly learning Torah is most important! Every morning right after
reciting birchos haTorah we all recite the passage from the Talmud stating
that "Talmud Torah keneged kulam". But still, can it be that anyone who
does not go into full-time learning is wasting his life? Hakadosh Baruch
Hu calls upon all people to be His slaves. The message Moshe Rabbeinu was
to deliver to Pharoh was, "shalach ami veya'avduin -- let My people go and
have them become My slaves." Until Pesach evening, the Jews were slaves
to Pharoh and then, when he freed them, they became slaves to Hashem.

The Jews in every generation were always at the forefront of fighting
for freedom. Our tradition teaches, however, that true freedom does not
mean that one is free to do whatever he pleases. Only one who is a slave
to Hashem and follows the Torah is considered truly free. In Hallel
we recite, "ani avdecha ben amosecha pitachto l'moseirai", i.e. that
only by becoming a complete slave to Hakadosh Baruch Hu do we feel that
"our shackles have been broken" and that we have become freed!

Moshe Rabbeinu was described by the Torah as "eved Hashem -- a slave of
Hashem." The Radak explains the use of this expression to describe Moshe
based on the Talmudic principle, "kol mah shekana eved kana rabbo --
everything a slave acquires is automatically transferred to his master."
Just as all that a slave does belongs to his master, so too everything
Moshe Rabbeinu did, all day long, was in the service of his Master,
Hashem. Similarly, when commenting on the passuk, "va'yered Moshe min
ha'har el ha'am" (Shemos 19:14), Chazal highlight the fact that even
though Moshe was returning from being on Har Sinai for forty days,
he did nothing for his own purposes when he came down, rather he went
straight back to serving Hashem's people.

The Torah calls upon all of us to serve as avadim to Hashem, "ki Li
Bnai Yisroel avadim" (Vayikra 26:55). The Rambam (Hilchos De'os 3:2-3),
citing the passuk (Mishlei 3:6), "bechol derachecha do'eihu" writes
that all of our daily activities -- getting dressed, eating, working,
spending time with our spouses and our children, sleeping, etc. -- should
be done lesheim Shomayim. The Rambam goes on to say that one who follows
this path is in constant service of Hashem! The Torah dictates not only
how we must deal in business but even how we should put on our shoes and
tie them, how we should shower, and how we should go to sleep at night. A
Jew can not divide his activities between the holy and the secular. All
day long we are avdei Hashem, and "kol mah shekana eved kana rabbo". All
of our activities are expected to be done in the service of our Master.

Our love for Hashem is expected to be all encompassing. We are called
upon to love him "with all of our hearts." Our love for our spouses and
family members is expected to be part of our love for Hashem. He wants
us to raise families.

After receiving semicha from Rav Yaakov Kaminetsky at Torah V'Da'as,
many of the students would go into secular fields. Rav Kaminetsky would
not rebuke them for the decision not to enter into the rabbinate or
chinuch. He would simply tell them that whatever they choose to do for
a living they must do honestly, and they must always act and deal with
others in a proper fashion to make a Kiddush Hashem.

The Torah tells us (Breshis 5:22) that Chanoch was a holy tzaddik who
"walked with Hashem". According to the Zohar, Chanoch was an honest
and hard-working shoemaker who did all of his work lesheim Shomayim.
Chanoch's life was one of great success; he acted as an eved to Hashem
by dedicating all of his daily activities to His service.

Copyright ? 2012 by The TorahWeb Foundation. All rights reserved.

Comparing all my haggados, they all have virtually the same text for the
Bittul Chametz which follows the Bedikah. But there are many differences in
the text for the Bittul which we say on the morning of Erev Pesach.

In the longest versions, there are three phrases:

- dachazitay ud'la chazitay
- dachamitay ud'la chamitay
- d'viartay ud'la viartay

The first thing I noticed is that some hagados put the first of those three in parentheses, and some omit it entirely.

The second thing I noticed is that in the Hagados which have a translation
(either into English, or translating this Aramaic into Hebrew) almost
always give only two phrases, generally relating to seeing and destroying.
Only a very few Hagados translate all three phrases. In the ArtScroll
Machzor, "observe" appears in the first phrase, and in the ArtScroll Youth
Haggadah, "recognize" appears first.

From Jastrow's dictionary, I got the impression that "chazi" and "chami"
are synonyms, with little or no difference between them, other than "chazi"
being more common in Bavel, and "chami" being more common in Eretz Yisrael.

If that is so, I find it curious that all the hagados include the Israeli
word, while the Bavel version is the one frequently omitted or
parenthesized. Even odder, that seems to be the reverse of the text in the
poskim: Mechaber 434:3 and Aruch Hashulchan 434:6 both have "chazi" but not
"chami".

I'd like to hear from others about this. Specifically, can anyone point to
a difference in meaning between "chazi" and "chami"? Or has anyone heard
anything authoritative regarding the proper nusach to use? Are there any
communities which specifically use one nusach or another?

As a side point, I note that all nuschaos include both parts of the third
phrase: "which I destroyed or did not destroy". Of course I must be mevatel
the chometz that I did not yet destory, but I find it odd that I'm also
being mevatel the chometz that I already destroyed. This seems superfluous
to me, and my guess is that "d'viartay" is included purely to preserve the
double-phrase symmetry of the section. If anyone can offer another reason
to include it, I'd be interested to hear it.

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
53 Year Old Mom Looks 33
The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4f87097f3b503396065st05vuc

From   http://torahmusings.com/2012/04/what-is-glatt/

To contemporary kosher consumers, the term "glatt" connotes much more 
than its specific technical definition regarding lumbar adhesions to 
a cow's lungs. However, exactly what it means is unclear. Does it 
mean "very kosher," adhering to a standard stricter than bare minimum 
requirements, similar to the "mehadrin" label used frequently in 
Israel? Or does it have a more halakhic definition?

R. J. David Bleich recently revisited the issue of force-fed veal, 
which R. Moshe Feinstein declared non-kosher decades ago but was 
largely ignored. R. Bleich dismissed R. Feinstein's objections as 
counter-factual but expressed concern over animals that are fed 
non-kosher food their entire lives. While the majority of authorities 
permit such an animal, a significant minority forbid. Can such an 
animal be considered "glatt"?

See the above URL for the rest of this article. YL



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120412/ed016cff/attachment-0001.htm>

I asked:

> But when I look for examples of Geulah, it seems to be a notable
> event, but not as big of a deal as I thought it would be. ...
> ...
> Does anyone else have this feeling, that Geula is a good thing,
> but not an extremely great thing?

I received an answer in this morning's email, in an article from Rabbi
Ephraim Schwartz of the Young Israel of Karmiel. You can read his entire
article at http://holylandinsights.blogspot.com/2012/04/third-cup-passover-2012.
html

Here's an except from there:

> V?Hotzaisi- I will take you out, V?Hitzalti- I will save you,
> V?Goalti- I will redeem you, V?Lokachti- I will take  you,
> V?Haveisi- I will bring you (to the land). What would be lacking
> without that middle one of redemption? Let?s say Hashem would
> have taken us out, saved us from the Egyptians, taken us as his
> nation (through giving us the Torah) and brought us to Israel.
> What would we have been missing? Mah Chaseir? What is that third
> cup really about?

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
53 Year Old Mom Looks 33
The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4f86e930e14f8389a27st03vuc

On 4/12/2012 9:38 AM, kennethgmil...@juno.com wrote:
>
> I received an answer in this morning's email, in an article from Rabbi
> Ephraim Schwartz of the Young Israel of Karmiel. You can read his
> entire article at http://holylandinsights.blogspot.com/2012/04/third-cup-pass
> over-2012.html
>    
>
" I believe it was Rav Hutner ZT"L who once complained about how the 
Christians stole Tanach from the Jews- after all they can quote Isaiah 
and Zedekiah better than most Jews; as the Jews stopped learning these 
works."

What?  When did this happen?

Lisa
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120412/b5088618/attachment-0001.htm>

Both R Micha and R. Zev provided arguments that metzitza is integral to the
performance of brit milah. But nothing either has written indicates that
metzitza b'peh is the only mandated method to accomplish metztitza. Unless
that is so, then the question remains, if the mandated metzitza can be
accomplished in a way that eliminates pikuach nefesh concerns, what is the
justification and/or the source requiring metzitza b'peh in light of the
possibility, however remote, of fatal consequences?

David I. Cohen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120412/fa5f5553/attachment-0001.htm>

On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 03:27:12PM -0500, Lisa Liel wrote:
> " I believe it was Rav Hutner ZT"L who once complained about how the  
> Christians stole Tanach from the Jews- after all they can quote Isaiah  
> and Zedekiah better than most Jews; as the Jews stopped learning these  
> works."
> What?  When did this happen?

Sometime before Rabbeinu Tam. See Tosafos Sanhedrin 24a d"h "belulah
bemiqra ubemishnah". Ashkenazim have been rationalizing our
diproportionate focus on Bavli for about a millennium now.

:-)||ii!
-Micha

R"n Lisa Liel exclaimed:

> What? When did this happen?

I suspect that both Rav Hutner's complaint and RLL's surprise might be
gender-related. I have gotten the distinct impression over the years that
women tend to learn much more Nach (actually, TAnach) than men do.

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
53 Year Old Mom Looks 33
The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4f8759f5e852d3b73fest03vuc

I just finished reciting the standard text of the `Eruv Tavshilin,
which, like the Qaddish, like the Ha Laxma `Aniya, begins in Aramaic,
and ends in Hebrew.

What makes it interesting is that, precisely in the region where the
text switches from Aramaic to Hebrew, there are two words of
indeterminate language, words that could be either Aramaic or Hebrew.
Specifically: either the last 3 words, or the last 4 words, or the
last 5 words, are Hebrew, while the rest of the words are Aramaic.

But where, exactly, is the transition?  I understand that the question
may be strictly indeterminate, like the cardinality of the continuum,
but maybe not.  Maybe thru an analysis of where other texts transition
from one language to another, you could assert with a high level of
confidence that in this text there are, e.g., only 3 Hebrew words, or
that there are, e.g., 5 Hebrew words.

The question actually has practical significance, because I want to
know how the authors of the text intended me to pronounce the word
which is spelled kaf-lamed and with the kaf vocalized with a qamatz.
If the word is Hebrew, then the qamatz is a qamatz qatan, and is
pronounced "call".  If the word is Aramaic, Aramaic lacks a qamatz
qatan, and the word should be pronounced "kahl", rhymes with "doll".


                        Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter
                        6424 N Whipple St
                        Chicago IL  60645-4111
                                (1-773)7613784   landline
                                (1-410)9964737   GoogleVoice
                                j...@m5.chicago.il.us
                                http://m5.chicago.il.us

                        "Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur"

I just noticed a mistake in my <<I believe I once sent out 
the seven various
shiurim, from 3 sq cm of R' Hayyim mi-Volozhin to 60 sq cm 
of the MB.>>  quoted by R'Micha.

I suppose that many realized that I should have written the 
matza volumes as cubic cm rather than square cm, but were 
too polite to correct me.

Pls excuse the error.


A guten chometz to all,.

David

Yesterday in EY was just Shabbos,  whereas here it was both Shabbos 
and the 8th Day of Yom Tov.  Therefore, it seems to me that there was 
more kedusha here yesterday than in EY.

Dare one say that yesterday it was preferable to be in Golus given 
the combination of the kedusha of Shabbos and the d'rabbonim kedusha 
of the 8th day of Pesach?

YL

On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 10:39:51AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote:
> Dare one say that yesterday it was preferable to be in Golus given the 
> combination of the kedusha of Shabbos and the d'rabbonim kedusha of the 
> 8th day of Pesach?

On the contrary, a reason often given for the importance of Bavel
continuing their minhag avos was that it takes two days of yom tov in
chu"l to get to the same qedushah as one day in Eretz Yisrael.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

IIRC RMF didn't say that veal isn't kosher. There are kashrut concerns 
with force fed calfs, and he wrote that a bal nefesh won't eat it, but 
he doesn't say that by definition the meat is treif.

Ben

On 4/12/2012 6:51 PM, Prof. Levine wrote:
>
>
> R. J. David Bleich recently revisited the issue of force-fed veal, 
> which R. Moshe Feinstein declared non-kosher decades ago but was 
> largely ignored.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20120415/0f672657/attachment.htm>

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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 30, Issue 18
**************************************

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..."