Avodah Mailing List

Volume 32: Number 158

Fri, 28 Nov 2014

• 1. Re: heter mechira - lo techanem (Ben Waxman)
• 2. Re: jacobs ladder (Micha Berger)
• 3. Re: jacobs ladder (Zev Sero)
• 4. Is Turkey Kosher? (Prof. Levine)
• 5. Re: Is Turkey Kosher? (Micha Berger)
• 6. Re: Once the Slaughterer is Given Permission... (Kenneth Miller)
• 7. Re: heter mechira - lo techanem (Kenneth Miller)
• 8. Non-circumcised Jew at Seder Pesach (Chaim.Tatel)
• 9. Re: Non-circumcised Jew at Seder Pesach (Micha Berger)
• 10. Re: Once the Slaughterer is Given Permission... (Michael Poppers)
• 11. Re: Non-circumcised Jew at Seder Pesach (menucha)
• 12. Re: Non-circumcised Jew at Seder Pesach (Zev Sero)
• 13. Re: Non-circumcised Jew at Seder Pesach (Zev Sero)
• 14. Re: Non-circumcised Jew at Seder Pesach (Kenneth Miller)
• 15. Re: Non-circumcised Jew at Seder Pesach (Zev Sero)
• 16. Tal UMatar on Dec 4 or 5 (Kenneth Miller)
• 17. Re: Tal UMatar on Dec 4 or 5 (Micha Berger)

So I would address this to the lawyers here:   A person signs a 
contract. What weight does his agreement or lack of agreement, or "lack 
of meeting of minds" matter once he signs?

Ben

On 11/26/2014 8:17 PM, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote:
>> So why is this contract different than any other contract that one
>> signs without fully understand, agreeing to, the clauses,
>> sub-clauses, sub-sub-clauses?
>
> A meeting of the minds is the most fundamental requirement of any 
> contract,
> and any court will throw out a contract where this was not present.  This
> doesn't necessarily mean a person is aware of all the details, but he 
> must
> certainly be aware of and agree to the purpose of the contract, i.e. the
> sale of his land. 

On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 06:18:07PM -0800, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote:
: according to yalkut shimoni
: sar of bavel went up 70 steps and went down
: sar of mede 52 steps
: sar of yavan 180 steps
: sar of edom went up and didnt come down

There is another opinion, popular among mequbalei Tzefas in which the
ladder had a mere 4 rungs. This is why Shalom Aleichem has 4 verses in
the more commoni nusach, and 5 among some chassidim and Edot heMizrach
who start on the ground before the first rung. Each verse is escorting
the mal'akhim one rung upwards.

BTW, this Yalqut is a source for identifying Edom as a galus, despite
being at a time when the core (if not the majority) of Jews lived in
EY.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Take time,
mi...@aishdas.org        be exact,
http://www.aishdas.org   unclutter the mind.
Fax: (270) 514-1507            - Rabbi Simcha Zissel Ziv, Alter of Kelm

On 11/26/2014 06:00 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote:
> BTW, this Yalqut is a source for identifying Edom as a galus, despite
> being at a time when the core (if not the majority) of Jews lived in EY.

You mean Yavan.

Please see the article by Rabbi Dr. Ari Z.  Zivotofsky at 
http://www.kashrut.com/articles/turk_part5/

IIRC neither Rav P. M. Teitz nor Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky ate turkey (ever).

On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 06:10:22PM -0500, Prof. Levine wrote:
: Please see the article by Rabbi Dr. Ari Z.  Zivotofsky at
: http://www.kashrut.com/articles/turk_part5

: IIRC neither Rav P. M. Teitz nor Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky ate turkey (ever).

And Rav Dovid Lifshitz's Thanksgiving "Turkey" was a goose, for this
reason.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

If I'm understanding R' Micha Berger correctly, he is asking: if you DO
subscribe to the idea that hashgachah peratis (HP) is universal across all
people, (which I interpret to mean that everything that happens to everyone
at every instant of their lives, is a specific and independent judgment
directly from Hashem, befitting that person and what he deserves at that
instant,) then how can it be that "Besha'ah shenitenah reshus lamashchis
lechavel eino mavchin bein tzadiq lerasha"? (Literally: When the destroyer
is given permission to cause injury, it [injures all, and] doesn't
distinguish between tzadik and rasha.)

It seems to me that this is merely the flip side of a different question.

Specifically: There are situations where even a real rasha is judged
leniently, for no reason specific to him, but rather because of external
factors. Sometimes we ask Hashem to go easy on us, even though we don't
deserve it, simply because we are Jewish. Sometimes people are advised to
make themselves indispensable to the kahal, as a sort of life insurance. If
those prayers and occupations succeed, then they violate Hashgacha Pratis,
do they not?

It seems to me that if the mechanisms allow for violations of HP in the
lenient direction, then there must be allowance for the other direction as
well. If we accept the idea that some situations allow for a "Get out of
jail free" card, then there must be a "Go directly to jail" card hidden
somewhere in the deck as well.

The possibility of getting that card is indeed a very scary thought. I
tremble at it, lo aleinu. But everything I've ever learned points to Hashem
being extremely fair in the way these things work. You can't have one
without the other. There is no free lunch.

(None of the above should be taken to mean the I understand how these
exceptions work into the equations. All I'm suggesting is that whatever
explanation works for one, will probably work for the other.)

Akiva Miller
____________________________________________________________
Odd Trick Fights Diabetes
"Unique" Proven Method To Control Blood Sugar In 3 Weeks. Watch Video.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/5476656893895656858bast04vuc

R' Ben Waxman asked:
> So I would address this to the lawyers here: A person signs a
> contract. What weight does his agreement or lack of agreement,
> or "lack of meeting of minds" matter once he signs?

And I'll address this similar question to the rabbis and dayanim:

Suppose someone claims that his kesubah is invalid - "There was no meeting
of minds. I shook my head but didn't really understand." (Let's say that
for whatever reason, the Mesdar Kidushin did *not* explain it to him.) In
such a case, is it relevant that the kesubah explicitly states (near the
end) that it's NOT an asmachta, and that it's NOT "tofsei d'shtarei" (which
I understand to mean a mere formality)? What if that clause was omitted for
some reason?

My wild guess is that this clause which appears on the kesubah has about as
much significance as the "user accepts all risk" which appears at the
amusement park. But it is a real question that I'm suddenly curious about.
Often, these disclaimers have no legal significance, but they are included
merely as an attempt to scare away possible lawsuits. I don't want to
believe that about Chazal. Is it possible that if a Beis Din feels that
there really was *no* meeting of minds, they will still rule the kesubah to
be enforceable because this clause was included?

Akiva Miller
____________________________________________________________
Odd Trick Fights Diabetes
"Unique" Proven Method To Control Blood Sugar In 3 Weeks. Watch Video.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/54767db58f41d7db556efst02vuc

Shalom from Outer Golus,

My friend's grandson did not have a bris. (The boy's mother wants him to decide when he gets older.)
 
Needless to day, the grandfather is very upset.

He asked me in shul last week to research whether or not he could invite the grandson to his Pesach seder.

We discussed korban Pesach and "v'chol areil lo yochal bo" but neither of us has a definitive psak regarding the modern seder.

Any ideas?
 
I looked in Mishna Berurah and online and haven't found anything yet.

With intermarriage rates being what they are, it's common to have the
question of whether to invite the Jewish spouse to the seder knowing it
means the non-Jewish spouse will come too. So, there are questions about
the prohibition of inviiting non-Jews because one might end up cooking
extra for the non-Jew (won't happen for surprise guests), for whom you
may not cook on Yom Tov, and of teaching Torah to non-Jews. Generally
they find heterim for both, for the sake of the Jewish spouse's
presence. However, we do not offer the non-Jew any afiqoman (Taz,
OC 167:18).

On the other hand, among Jews. tamei people do eat from the
afiqoman. Perhaps because tum'ah is not a permanent condition, so
the memorialization is still fitting. Well, being an areil is also
correctable. By the time the commemoration becomes a real qorban pesach,
the non-Jew will likely still be a non-Jew, but the beris milah will be
taken care of.

So it seems to me the only open question here is the afiqoman, not the
seder as a whole. And I have no sources, but I suspect we share the
afiqoman with him as well.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Here is the test to find whether your mission
mi...@aishdas.org        on Earth is finished:
http://www.aishdas.org   if you're alive, it isn't.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                        - Richard Bach

In Avodah V32n157, R'Micha asked for thoughts on "Besha'ah shenitenah
reshus lamashchis lechavel//eino mavchin bein tzadiq lerasha", and RZS
replied:
> AIUI there's no contradiction.  It's not that there's no individual
decision "mi yichyeh umi yamus", it's that at such a time merit is not
a factor in making that decision.   The weight of the "merit" property
is temporarily set to 0, and the decision is made entirely on other
grounds, that may seem random to us.  Each person is judged, but the
tzadik and the rasha are, ceteris paribu, judged equally. <
I understand that *ma'amar* as referring to a community/region-wide
judgment in which individuals are _not judged individually_.  Put another
way, the community is judged as one "individual".  As R'Micha may recall,
that is how, some time ago on Avodah, I explained Av haRachamim and its
emphasis on "q'hilos haqodesh," not on individual Yidden (and, to segue
slightly into the "Av Harachmim this Shabbat" thread, that may be why even
R'Micha's "Yekke [community]"s say AhR just before 9Av, the day on which we
mourn not only the nation-affecting events listed in the *g'mara* but also
other events of significant/community-level magnitude).  May we see no more
such "chavalos"!

All the best from
*Michael Poppers* * Elizabeth, NJ, USA
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20141127/1f9ce96d/attachment-0001.htm>

Chaim.Tatel via Avodah wrote:
> He asked me in shul last week to research whether or not he could invite
> the grandson to his Pesach seder.

Mikraei Kodesh (chapter 9 footnote 20) quotes Rav Neventzal Shlt"a,
that in a time when there is no korban pesach an arel (and tamei) is
obligated in all the mitzvot of leil haseder and eats from the afikoman.

menucha

On 11/27/2014 12:24 PM, Chaim.Tatel via Avodah wrote:
> He asked me in shul last week to research whether or not he could
> invite the grandson to his Pesach seder.

It's not even a shayla. Of *course* he can and should invite the boy
to his seder.

There's no hava amina not to. Even bizman habayis, areilim *must* have
attended their families' sedarim; after all, they were obligated to keep
all the mitzvos of the night except Korban Pesach, and their father was
obligated in "vehigadta levincha", so how could they *not* be there?
Obviously when the Korban Pesach was distributed, they were left out
(or if this would hurt them they could be given a piece of chulin meat).
Nowadays when we have no Pesach the answer can only be clearer: the
boy must be at the seder, if only his parents can be prevailed upon
to allow him to come. Aderaba, if he is to "make his own decision"
then the grandfather has an even greater obligation to do all he can to
educate him to make the right decision when the time comes, and that
must include participating in the seder. I don't even see a problem
in giving him a piece of afikomen; it's only *zecher* laPesach, it's
not a Pesach itself, so even bizman habayis he could eat it. (For all
we know, perhaps bizman habayis areilim would eat an afikomen, zecher
to the Pesach that they could not eat.)


On 11/27/2014 01:34 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote:
>   However, we do not offer the non-Jew any afiqoman (Taz, OC 167:18).

The Taz does not say that at all.  He says not to give a non-Jew from
the matzas mitzvah, which is the piece that was left over *after* the
afikoman was separated from it!

On 11/27/2014 01:34 PM, menucha via Avodah wrote:
> Chaim.Tatel via Avodah wrote:
>> He asked me in shul last week to research whether or not he could invite
>> the grandson to his Pesach seder.
>
> Mikraei Kodesh (chapter 9 footnote 20) quotes Rav Neventzal Shlt"a,
> that in a time when there is no korban pesach an arel (and tamei) is
> obligated in all the mitzvot of leil haseder and eats from the afikoman.

And when there is a korban pesach?   Surely he is still obligated in all
the mitzvos except that one.

R' Micha Berger wrote:
> However, we do not offer the non-Jew any afiqoman (Taz, OC 167:18).

R' Zev Sero responded:

> The Taz does not say that at all.  He says not to give a non-Jew
> from the matzas mitzvah, which is the piece that was left over
> *after* the afikoman was separated from it!

With all due respect, I think the Taz went even further than what RZS says. Here's my translation of that Taz:

"I saw in the sefer Taamei Mitzvos of the Rekanti, that he warned people
about Matzas Mitzvah, not to feed it to someone who isn't a Ben Bris. He
gave a good reason for it, and so I have seen many people having the custom
to be careful about it on Pesach. M'maylah, one also needs to be careful
about this regarding the slice of Hamotzi, because it has the same reason."

Given that this does not appear in Hilchos Pesach, but rather in Hilchos
Betzias Hapas, it seems to me that when the Taz spoke about Hamotzi, he was
not referring specifically to the Seder, but to ANY Hamotzi of the year.
This surprises me greatly. Does anyone have that Rekanti? What is the
reason behind this?

Akiva Miller
____________________________________________________________
What's your flood risk?
Find flood maps, interactive tools, FAQs, and agents in your area.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/54777ff7547f47ff709d8st04vuc

On 11/27/2014 02:47 PM, Kenneth Miller via Avodah wrote:

> Given that this does not appear in Hilchos Pesach, but rather in
> Hilchos Betzias Hapas, it seems to me that when the Taz spoke about
> Hamotzi, he was not referring specifically to the Seder, but to ANY
> Hamotzi of the year. This surprises me greatly. Does anyone have that
> Rekanti? What is the reason behind this?


You're proceeding backwards.   The Taz *starts* with the case of the
piece on which one said hamotzi.  He says the Bet Yosef quotes the Kol Bo
and the Abudraham that one should not give from it to an animal or a nochri.
But the BY doesn't know a reason for it, so the Taz cites R Menachem
Recanati in the case of matzos mitzvah, and says that if so the same
would apply to the piece on which hamotzi was said.

None of which has to do with the afikoman.

Those (such as myself, l'tzaari) who are still in Chutz Laaretz will begin
to include Tal U'Matar in our Shmoneh Esreh this coming week. The poskim
describe the date when this begins, but it is very difficult to do so
without using the word "December".

In this century, we begin Tal U'Matar at Maariv on the 4th or 5th of
December. But which is it? I found a simple way to cite that rule without
using the terms "February" or "leap year", and I'd like to share it with
the chevra. Namely: We usually begin on Dec 4, but in a Jewish year which
is evenly divisible by 4, we begin on Dec 5.

So, for example: We are now in 5775, which is not divisible by 4, so we
begin in a few days, on Dec 4. Next year, we'll be in 5776, which *is*
divisible by 4, so we'll start on Dec 5.

BTW, this calculation may alleviate a small portion of the confusion which
will arise 85 years from now, in December 2099/5800. In that year, we will
begin on Dec 5, even though 2100 will not be a leap year under the current
rules. And in the following years we'll begin not on Dec 4 or 5, but rather
on Dec 5 or 6. I hope that by then we'll all be home in Eretz Yisrael and
the matter will become moot.

Akiva Miller
____________________________________________________________
Heavy rains mean flooding
Anywhere it rains it can flood. Learn your risk. Get flood insurance.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/54789bc4ab7251bc43429st04vuc

On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 03:57:46PM +0000, Kenneth Miller via Avodah wrote:
: Those (such as myself, l'tzaari) who are still in Chutz Laaretz will
: begin to include Tal U'Matar in our Shmoneh Esreh this coming week. The
: poskim describe the date when this begins, but it is very difficult to
: do so without using the word "December".

It's not that hard, just not that useful. We begin on the 60th day of
tequfas Tishrei according to tequfah d'Shmuel. 2/3 of the way through
the (appx) season. Shemu'el's approximation is the same as the Julian
Calendar, so you could say that Tal uMatar is always on Julian November
21 or 22. No need to refer to "December", and closer to the original
intent behind the choice of date.

I am not sure if Shemu'el was basing himself on the Julian calendar
and consequent ease of use to pick a date on it, or independently chose
what happened to be the same estimate. The Julian Calendar went live
in 45 BCE, Shemu'el was born around 165 CE, although within the Sassanid
empire, not the Roman one -- different calendar. And, approximating the
solar year as 365-1/4 days is so straightforward. Last, if he was really
going for ease of use, why not have it alway on Nov 21?

Shmu'el certainly knew enough astronomy to know the quality of the
estimate, cf Berakhos 58b, RH 20b, or Chillin 95b when he precomputed the
calentdar forward for 60 years. It would seem Shmuel knew tequfah deR'
Ada, or at least something close enough to work for at least 60 years,
but held the 365-1/4 estimate was good enough for some things (including
Birkhas haChamah).

Anyway, gatting back to the point: In the Julian calendar we start
saying Tal uMatar on Nov 21 or 22. The 13 day shift is because you're
using the word "December" to mean the Gregorian one. Still, it means
that Shmu'el's implied leap day is before Feb 29th. Tequfas Tishrei
is always on (alternatively: happens to always coincide with) Julian
Sep 24, coinciding with Gregorian Oct 7 in the years 1800-2099. But the
quarter-day means that the tequfah cycles between 3am (2012), 9am (2013),
3pm (2014), and 9pm (in 2015). 9pm is after sheq'iah, so in 2015, the
tequfah is one Jewish day later -- our implied leap day. And it occurs
when computing the start of the tequfah, before the Tal uMatar date,
unlike Feb 29th which is after. So that one year, even the Julian date
is one off.

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             You will never "find" time for anything.
mi...@aishdas.org        If you want time, you must make it.
http://www.aishdas.org                     - Charles Buxton
Fax: (270) 514-1507


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



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


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


***************************************

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