Avodah Mailing List

Volume 31: Number 65

Sun, 14 Apr 2013

• 1. Re: YHA nidche (Micha Berger)
• 2. Re: Chazakah vs Plausibility (hankman)
• 3. Re: YT Sheni in Eretz Yisrael (was Minhagim for (Chana Luntz)
• 4. Re: YHA nidche (Simon Montagu)
• 5. 50 (Eli Turkel)
• 6. Re: YHA nidche (Zev Sero)
• 7. Proper Attire For Shabbos (cantorwolb...@cox.net)
• 8. kinyan hagbaah (Eli Turkel)
• 9. Re: 50 (Micha Berger)
• 10. Re: 50 (Lisa Liel)
• 11. Re: YHA nidche (Harry Maryles)
• 12. Re: 50 (Micha Berger)
• 13. Re: kinyan hagbaah (Zev Sero)
• 14. Re: 50 (Lisa Liel)
• 15. Re: 50 (Micha Berger)
• 16. Re: 50 (Lisa Liel)
• 17. Re: 50 (Micha Berger)
• 18. 50 (Eli Turkel)
• 19. Rebbi Akiva, Rabbon Gamliel, Who Brings the Chatos (Meir Rabi)

My father sheyichyeh once suggested to me that there is a strong reason
to favor the nidcheh / muqdam date over 5 Iyyar. The existence of a
country in which the legal holidays are moved around so as to minimize
chilul Shabbos is much of the significance of the event.

OTOH, if you really believe that 5 Iyyar is the anniversary of an event
worthy of saying Hallel, that argument doesn't really workd for a moved
date. My father's line of reasoning only makes sense to me for those
who don't say Hallel.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 16th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        2 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Gevurah sheb'Tifferes: What type of discipline
Fax: (270) 514-1507                             does harmony promote?

RZS wrote:
Ah, so you *are* choosing a class. You have abandoned the proposition
you made just above, that we must consider *all* possible classes in which
our subject is a member. Now we're back at my previous question, how do
you choose a class?

CM responds:
I took it as axiomatic that the rov must be relevent to the question
discussed. If the issue was ?will the man die? then your ?rov? would be
relevant as in the expression ?nothing is sure but death and taxes? (the
death part). However the question here is whether someone who was alive
before us can survive until now and your ?rov? is logically irrelevent to
that question.

RZS wrote:
I think you will find that it is in fact true even today. If it isn't,
then it will surely be true 100 years from now, unless Moshiach comes.
CM responds:
I do not get your point. How will the rov change in the time of moshiach?
And even If you explain how I presume techias hameisim changes the rov, why
would a future change to the rov have any effect today? (Wandering far
afield ? it has never been clear to me if after the techia, those living at
that time continue to die as per ain bain olam hazeh l?yimos hamoshiach
eilo shibud malchios bilvad or not).

Kol tuv
Chaim Manaster
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20130411/ee77ae62/attachment-0001.htm>

I wrote:

>But if you accept that somebody who comes to settle, while keeping all
their other minhagim from their time in >galus, abandons the second day, you
get back to the logic of the Chatam Sofer.

Obviously I meant here the Chacham Zvi.


Regards
Chana

On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 4:07 AM, Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org> wrote:

> My father sheyichyeh once suggested to me that there is a strong reason
> to favor the nidcheh / muqdam date over 5 Iyyar. The existence of a
> country in which the legal holidays are moved around so as to minimize
> chilul Shabbos is much of the significance of the event.
>
> OTOH, if you really believe that 5 Iyyar is the anniversary of an event
> worthy of saying Hallel, that argument doesn't really workd for a moved
> date. My father's line of reasoning only makes sense to me for those
> who don't say Hallel.
>

Leshitat R Nahman that Kriat Megilla is instead of Hallel, why is Hallel on
a moved date worse than Kriat Megilla on a moved date (as in the first
Mishna of Megilla)?

Leshitat HaMe'iri, that the halacha is like R Nahman and therefore someone
without a megilla should say Hallel on Purim, I wonder when they say Hallel
when megilla is brought forward.

It's my belief that today our mindset is much more precise than Hazal's,
witness the fuss some people make about exact measurement of shi`urim, or
hanetz minyans who time themselves to the second by atomic clocks. I'm not
sure that they would have seen an anniversary being off by one or two days
as an issue, even.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20130412/ed6941a9/attachment-0001.htm>

Is there any connection (in machshavah) between the 50 days between Pesach
and Shvuot and the 50 years of Yovel (both actually 7x7)

For a drasha for someone's 50th anniversary


-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20130412/c44234cb/attachment-0001.htm>

On 12/04/2013 2:05 AM, Simon Montagu wrote:
>
> Leshitat R Nahman that Kriat Megilla is instead of Hallel, why is
> Hallel on a moved date worse than Kriat Megilla on a moved date (as
> in the first Mishna of Megilla)?
>
> Leshitat HaMe'iri, that the halacha is like R Nahman and therefore
> someone without a megilla should say Hallel on Purim, I wonder when
> they say Hallel when megilla is brought forward.

When is megillah ever moved?  The official reading is always on one
of the two days decreed by Chazal.  By special dispensation villagers
can read it on one of the three preceding days, but 1) the official
reading remains on the correct day, and they're merely being allowed
to read now as if it were then; 2) this is only possible because the
AKHG gave authority for it in the pasuk itself, which means it was
part of the original takanah, not a later innovation.


> It's my belief that today our mindset is much more precise than
> Hazal's, witness the fuss some people make about exact measurement of
> shi`urim, or hanetz minyans who time themselves to the second by
> atomic clocks. I'm not sure that they would have seen an anniversary
> being off by one or two days as an issue, even.

On the contrary, the gemara has to find authority in the pasuk for the
early reading days, and rejects the possibility of reading it on the
16th or 17th because no such authority can be found.


-- 
Zev Sero               A citizen may not be required to offer a 'good and
z...@sero.name          substantial reason' why he should be permitted to
                        exercise his rights. The right's existence is all
                        the reason he needs.
                            - Judge Benson E. Legg, Woollard v. Sheridan

Marty Bluke wrote:
The analogy is flawed, because with regard to Shabbos there is a
mitzva of kavod, kavod implies a distinction between what you wear on
the weekday and what you wear on shabbos. There is no such
corresponding halacha by Pesach.

I understand what you are saying but that is not the point of my analogy. 
My analogy is that instead of the brown suit, you can wear the black suit for Shabbos.
They are both suits but just as you have to not eat matzo erev Pesach, 
you can't wear the brown suit on Shabbos (I was equating erev Pesach with Shabbos).
Just as you can't eat matzo on Erev Pesach, you can't wear the brown suit on Shabbos. 
But as soon as Pesach comes, you have to eat matzah and just as
soon as Shabbos comes, you have to wear the black suit (but not before Shabbos). 

When one lifts an item in a supermarket to buy it but decides to put it
back before getting to the cashier - can one really put it back on the
shelf? Why isnt
one halachically buiying it by picking it up even without paying?

The closest I found was a teshuva of R. Zilberstein that if one leaves
groceries in
a supermarket to be delivered and they get stolen before delivery that the
loss is the one
who bought them since he made a kinyan meshichah.
The only question is whether the store owner is a shomer chinam or a shomer
sachar (or perhaps not even a shomer chinam)
He paskens that in a modern supermarket the supermarket is a shomer sachar.

Nevertheless the assumption is that it belongs to the customer because he
picked it up or
pulled and it doesnt matter whether that was before or after payment

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20130412/37cc3074/attachment-0001.htm>

On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 02:27:14PM +0300, Eli Turkel wrote:
: For a drasha for someone's 50th anniversary

For my parents, I leveraged "ben chamishim le'eitzah", "olam shesed
yibaneh" combined with "va'avado le'olam -- ad hayovel", and the like.
See http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2008/08/ben-chamishim-leaitzah.shtml

:-)BBii!
-Micha

In both cases, there's a positive commandment to count each one.  This 
shows us that it isn't the time elapsed that's the most important thing, 
but each individual piece that makes up the whole.

On 4/12/2013 6:27 AM, Eli Turkel wrote:
> Is there any connection (in machshavah) between the 50 days between 
> Pesach
> and Shvuot and the 50 years of Yovel (both actually 7x7)
>
> For a drasha for someone's 50th anniversary
>

--- On?Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 4:07 AM, Micha Berger?<mi...@aishdas.org>?wrote:?

My father sheyichyeh once suggested to me that there is a strong reason
to favor the nidcheh / muqdam date over 5 Iyyar. The existence of a
country in which the legal holidays are moved around so as to minimize
chilul Shabbos is much of the significance of the event.

OTOH, if you really believe that 5 Iyyar is the anniversary of an event
worthy of saying Hallel, that argument doesn't really workd for a moved
date. My father's line of reasoning only makes sense to me for those
who don't say Hallel.
-------------------------------------------
R' Ahron Soloveichik paskined that Hallel is said on Heh Iyar. There is no
Nidche for Hallel. Celebrations that are moved Sunday night/Monday so as to
prevent Chilul Shabbos have nothing to do with saying Halllel.
HM

Want Emes and Emunah in your life? 



Try this: http://haemtza.blogspot.com/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20130412/9d5991e8/attachment-0001.htm>

On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 09:19:34AM -0500, Lisa Liel wrote:
> In both cases, there's a positive commandment to count each one.  This  
> shows us that it isn't the time elapsed that's the most important thing,  
> but each individual piece that makes up the whole.

Although the count doesn't make the day. Shavuos is still Shavuos for
people who didn't make it all the way through the counting.

I think the tightness of linkage between the two counts may depend on
whether Yovel is skipped when counting shemittah. Then shemittah is more
like the 7 shavuos of omer. But if yovel isn't in sync with shemittah,
it's less of a parallel. We recently discussed the fact that the Rambam
holds that when there is a yovel, it doesn't count toward shemittah. But
it's a machloqes tannaim. Does everyone hold like the Rambam?

:-)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?

On 12/04/2013 7:33 AM, Eli Turkel wrote:
> When one lifts an item in a supermarket to buy it but decides to put it
> back before getting to the cashier - can one really put it back on the shelf? Why isnt
> one halachically buiying it by picking it up even without paying?
>

For the same reason that if I walk into your home and pick things up they
don't become mine.  There's no agreement between us for a sale to occur.

-- 
Zev Sero               A citizen may not be required to offer a 'good and
z...@sero.name          substantial reason' why he should be permitted to
                        exercise his rights. The right's existence is all
                        the reason he needs.
                            - Judge Benson E. Legg, Woollard v. Sheridan

On 4/12/2013 1:31 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 09:19:34AM -0500, Lisa Liel wrote:
>    
>> In both cases, there's a positive commandment to count each one.  This
>> shows us that it isn't the time elapsed that's the most important thing,
>> but each individual piece that makes up the whole.
>>      
> Although the count doesn't make the day. Shavuos is still Shavuos for
> people who didn't make it all the way through the counting.
>
> I think the tightness of linkage between the two counts may depend on
> whether Yovel is skipped when counting shemittah. Then shemittah is more
> like the 7 shavuos of omer. But if yovel isn't in sync with shemittah,
> it's less of a parallel. We recently discussed the fact that the Rambam
> holds that when there is a yovel, it doesn't count toward shemittah. But
> it's a machloqes tannaim. Does everyone hold like the Rambam?
>    

I may have missed that.  What do you mean it doesn't count towards 
shmitta?  I thought the only question was whether Yovel is also the 
first year of the next shmitta cycle or not.

Lisa

On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 01:44:14PM -0500, Lisa Liel wrote:
> I may have missed that.  What do you mean it doesn't count towards  
> shmitta?  I thought the only question was whether Yovel is also the  
> first year of the next shmitta cycle or not.

That *is* what I mean.

Say one yovel is the year after shemittah.

According to the Chakhamim, we count 7 shemittos after it, adding up to
49 years, and the 50th yr is yovel again.

According to R' Yehudah, yovel is also the first year toward the next
shemitah; ie the next shemittah is only the 6th yr toward the yovel cycle
and the 7th shemittah is only 48 years after yovel. Thus, the next yovel
would be year 2 of the 8th cycle.

And the one after that -- yr 3 of the 15th cycle, etc...

:-)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?

On 4/12/2013 3:08 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 01:44:14PM -0500, Lisa Liel wrote:
>    
>> I may have missed that.  What do you mean it doesn't count towards
>> shmitta?  I thought the only question was whether Yovel is also the
>> first year of the next shmitta cycle or not.
>>      
> That *is* what I mean.
>
> Say one yovel is the year after shemittah.
>
> According to the Chakhamim, we count 7 shemittos after it, adding up to
> 49 years, and the 50th yr is yovel again.
>
> According to R' Yehudah, yovel is also the first year toward the next
> shemitah; ie the next shemittah is only the 6th yr toward the yovel cycle
> and the 7th shemittah is only 48 years after yovel. Thus, the next yovel
> would be year 2 of the 8th cycle.
>    
Yes, but R' Yehuda holds that there are only 49 years from one yovel to 
the next.  That yovel is *both* the 50th year of one cycle and the 1st 
year of the next.  That's why he says "Yovel oleh l'khan u-l'khan" 
(Nedarim 61a).

Lisa

On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 03:28:23PM -0500, Lisa Liel wrote:
> Yes, but R' Yehuda holds that there are only 49 years from one yovel to  
> the next.  That yovel is *both* the 50th year of one cycle and the 1st  
> year of the next.  That's why he says "Yovel oleh l'khan u-l'khan"  
> (Nedarim 61a).

I thought lekan ulekan meant "for yovel and for shemittah", and the
following gemara explaining that point. See Rashi d"h "yobel oleh leminyan
shavua", who paraphases "dishnas chamishim oleh lekan ulekan".


Offlist, Lisa pointed me to
<http://www.haoros.com/Archive/index.asp?kovetz=1018&;cat=6&haoro=4>
by R Yosef Yitzchaq Keller. I wanted to share the reference with the
chevra.

:-)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?

<<In both cases, there's a positive commandment to count each one.  This
shows us that it isn't the time elapsed that's the most important thing,
but each individual piece that makes up the whole.>>

This implies that the number 50 has no significance. I am looking for some
significance to the number 50 or at least 7x7

BTW Lisa's remarks implies that the omer consists of many pieces while
Behag holds it is one mitzva
Again, I am trying to avoid the discussion whether yovel is the first year
of the next shmitta
and concentrate on the significance of 50

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20130413/b3554573/attachment-0001.htm>

I have recently been BH, distracted by various matters that have brought
great joy to our family and have thus not been attentive to the discussions
here.

I will now try to address some of these issues. Please advise me if I have
omitted anything significant.

Firstly, I assure Rabbir Teitz that his most noble gesture of publicly
requesting my Mechila is at the same time humbling as it is unnecessary. I
took no offense and yet I am sure that all will agree that Rabbi Teitz?s
actions and words speak volumes for his integrity and love for Torah, HKBH
and BNY.

I have only glanced at the Sh Aruch that Rabbi Teitz mentioned and my first
observation is Bravo. This is truly quite an astounding Chiddush and
testimony to Rabbi Teitzs Bekius. Secondly, I note that this is a Chiddush
of the RaMBaM, and not recorded by the Tur, although the BYosef does
discuss it and records it in the ShAruch.

And I note finally, that this is quite peripheral to my main analysis, that
RG did not have the power nor did he even want RY, to actually be Mechallel
YK. [Which is the main underlying theme of this discussion - is the
individual responsible for his actions even when he follows the ruling of
BD. In other words, Who brings the Chatos? and consequently can the BD
compel compliance with their ruling? It does not make much sense that the
BD can coerce people to follow their Pesak and then those same people must
bring their own Chatos when BD realise that they have erred in their
ruling] Thus RG decree was a request, a request that he knew would be
honoured, just as RG knew that RY would honour him even without a request
or a decree, and had no fear that RY might publicly display that he held
that day to NOT be YK.


Do we know where RY was on that day, that taking his walking stick and his
money, he walked to Yavneh? Why is it any more reasonable to suggest that
he walked from beyond the Techum than to imagine that he walked within the
Techum? Besides, that would not have been as effective a public display as
RY wearing leather shoes or sandals.

Furthermore, may we assume that it would have been normal for those times
for the people to wear leather footwear? Is it not reasonable to assert
that the Mishna?s omission of RY putting on his shoes, as it lists his
taking his walking stick and his money, is significant and worthy of being
noted?



Concerning the various versions that are recorded regarding the exchanges
that RY had with RA and others, I merely note that from the Mishnah it
appears that even following RA exposition that validated RG?s ruling and
setting of Rosh Chodesh, RY was still mightily distressed. We don?t see
that he was at all decided to abide RG instruction or not. AFAIK, we may
well suggest he was quite happy to go and felt no sense of humiliation in
submitting himself to RG ruling: his distress was entirely due to his
thinking that the people would all be missing and desecrating the true day
of YK.

Now going back to Rabbi Teitz?s suggested resolution of the anomalies
between the Mishna?s version and the Berayasa?s version of what RA said ?
From the Mishnah it seems that RY was NOT happy to accept RA exposition. He
perhaps deemed it to be a bit of clever footwork but not really a true
Halachically binding or legitimate approach. He therefore did not say
Akivah, you have comforted me; and he still sought comfort elsewhere.

In the Berayasa?s version, RA offered an exposition that RY did accept.
Perhaps he accepted it because it was  -  as the Berayasa intimates  -  the
exposition of RY himself, and was therefore immediately comforted. Indeed,
according to this analysis, there are two versions as to what RA actually
said to RY and whether RY did teach this Derasha.

Best,

Meir G. Rabi
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20130414/132a015e/attachment.htm>

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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 31, Issue 65
**************************************

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..."


A list of common acronyms is available at at
        http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/acronyms.cgi
(They are also visible in the web archive copy of each digest.)