Avodah Mailing List

Volume 33: Number 1

Thu, 01 Jan 2015

• 1. Re: MAKING COFFEE ON SHABBOS (Prof. Levine)
• 2. Re: Zmanim app (Zev Sero)
• 3. Re: Zmanim app (Micha Berger)
• 4. Re: Zmanim app (Kenneth Miller)
• 5. Re: Escorting the Queen (Kenneth Miller)
• 6. Re: Escorting the Queen (Micha Berger)
• 7. Re: Zmanim app (Zev Sero)
• 8. Re: Zmanim app (Kenneth Miller)
• 9. Re: Zmanim app (Micha Berger)
• 10. Re: Zmanim app (Zev Sero)
• 11. Re: Escorting the Queen (Kenneth Miller)
• 12. MBP Shabbos (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi)
• 13. Re: MBP Shabbos (Zev Sero)
• 14. Re: MBP Shabbos (Micha Berger)
• 15. Re: MBP Shabbos (Zev Sero)
• 16. robot writing sefer torah (Eli Turkel)

Another article on the subject: 
<http:
//www.torahmusings.com/2014/08/making-tea-coffee-shabbos/>http:
//www.torahmusings.com/2014/08/making-tea-coffee-shabbos/


R. Gil Student sent me this link. YL



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20141226/4faa874a/attachment.htm>

On 12/26/2014 09:56 AM, Kenneth Miller via Avodah wrote:
> Personally, I think this makes a lot of sense in theory. But putting
> it in practice is very different: What point in Yerushalayim was used
> for these calculations? Why use Yerushalayim and not Bavel or Har
> Sinai?

I don't think anyone actually says "Yerushalayim" bedavka.  It's Eretz
Yisrael, because that's where the Tana'im lived.  EY is all pretty much
at the same latitude; the difference between the length of twilight in
the Galil and the Negev is negligible, *especially* at the equinox,
when twilights are at their shortest anyway.


> Are all equinox days the same?

Yes, by definition.  The equinox is the point when the sun is
perpendicular to the earth, and thus any spot's transit through
the "twilight zone" is shortest.


> How much deviance is allowed in these calculations?

No calculation can be accurate, because it can't predict atmospheric
conditions which affect the refraction of sunlight through the
atmosphere.  This factor, which is unavoidable, dwarfs any uncertainty
due to ambiguity in the sources.


> Do we agree on the definition of "sunrise"?

No, in fact we don't.  People usually assume that sunrise and sunset
are to be measured at sea level.  Some say they should be measured
at the person's own altitude.  And the Alter Rebbe says they should
be measured at the altitude of "the high mountains of Eretz Yisrael",
which R SDB Levin convincingly (IMHO) argues means Mt Carmel.

On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 12:57:29PM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote:
: My Zmanim app gives many possible times for different situations.
: For example, for putting on tallit/teffilin, it shows three
: different possibilities: 10.2 degrees (the sun is 10.2 degrees below
: the geometric zenith), 11 degrees, 11.5 degrees...

Here's the problem, as I saw it when we discussed it a few months ago:

Taking misheyaqir literally and experientially is fine for a day that's
not too overcast, and back before we started artificially lighting our
neighborhoods. Today we really can't tell when the sun is approaching
the horizon enough to provide the requisite amount of light.

Speaking as someone who lives close enough to NYC to be incapable of
ever seeing three middle sized stars from my home.

What we do have instead is precision chronometry. So, if we could compute
when it would have happened, we can use that for misheyaqir.

So now the question is translating amounts of light to angles of sun
declination.

With one more complication... Sometmes the time is given in mil, which
depends on average walking speed (at some point in the past), not
on the season, length of day, and angle.

So one has to figure out which day they're talking about:
    - most chamur case in EY
    - average case
    - at the equinoxes

Now, it's normally assumed that the average case and the equinoxes are
the same day. HOWEVER, note that the earliest Shabbos is not after the
shortest Friday. Noon moves, or IOW, sunrise and sunset do not change
daily at the same speed.

Meanwhile, many acharonim do not do things scientifically, and use
fixed times or sha'os zemaniyos. (Which, as I showed then, isn't the
same as using angle. I also experimented with a "sha'ah" that is 1/12
of the night when the time is from sunset to sunrise.) After all, the
science, while logical from the ab initio definitions of misheyaqir,
tzeis, etc... needs all the above work to fit earlier descriptions.

Or, an acharon could decide to find a dark location near the objective,
and determine experimentally what the angle should be. Which is what most
Americans do for tzeis -- those of us who don't wait for Rabbeinu Tam
or other Rishonim's  time aren't ending Shabbos a mere 3/4 mil (13.5 to
16.5 min) even if we were to turn it into an angle for my latitude
or sha'ah zemanis.

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             A person lives with himself for seventy years,
mi...@aishdas.org        and after it is all over, he still does not
http://www.aishdas.org   know himself.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            - Rav Yisrael Salanter

I asked:
> What point in Yerushalayim was used for these calculations?
> Why use Yerushalayim and not Bavel or Har Sinai?

R' Zev Sero responded:
> I don't think anyone actually says "Yerushalayim" bedavka. It's
> Eretz Yisrael, because that's where the Tana'im lived.  EY is
> all pretty much at the same latitude; the difference between
> the length of twilight in the Galil and the Negev is negligible,
> *especially* at the equinox, when twilights are at their shortest
> anyway.

First, in order to do the calculations, you DO need to choose a specific
location. That means not only a specific city, but a stop *in* that city.
You might choose to work with approximate numbers, but those number *will*
represent one specific location.

In any case, "negligible" is an opinion. Here are some numbers, and y'all can decide for yourselves how negligible the differences are.

Here are some latitudes, taken from each location's Wikipedia article, rounded to 0.1 degree:

33.4 degrees North - Pumbedita
32.8 degrees North - Tiberias
31.8 degrees North - Jerusalem
31.5 degrees North - Sura (city)
31.1 to 27.8 degrees North - Sinai

According to "Tables of Sunrise Sunset and Twilight", published by the US
Naval Observatory, here is how long Astronomical Twilight (18 degrees below
the horizon) lasts at these latitudes on March 21:

34 degrees North: 84 minutes
33 degrees North: 83 minutes
32 degrees North: 82 minutes
31 degrees North: 81 minutes

This suggests that even on the equinox itself, it takes almost two minutes
longer to reach the same degree of darkness in Pumbedisa than in Sura! But
that's just for the equinox. Here's Astronomical Twilight on June 21:

34 degrees North: 105 minutes
33 degrees North: 103 minutes
32 degrees North: 100 minutes
31 degrees North: 98 minutes

In other words, on June 21, it takes about 103.8 minutes to reach 18
degrees in Pumbedisa, but only about 99.0 minutes in Sura. My point is that
the location you choose to answer the "How many degrees?" question will
have a big impact when you apply that number of degrees for calculations
wherever you happen to be.

Akiva Miller
____________________________________________________________
Apple's Crazy New Gizmo
Forget the iPhone 6. Next hit Apple product leaked. (see picture)
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/549db507766d335072889st01vuc

Over Shabbos, I looked into sources for the "Melaveh Malka". Let's begin with the Gemara:

Shabbos 119b: R' Elazar said one should always set his table on Erev
Shabbos, even if he only needs a kezayis. R' Chanina said one should always
set his table on Motzaei Shabbos, even if he only needs a kezayis. Hot
water on Motzaei Shabbos is a refuah; fresh bread on Motzaei Shabbos is a
refuah. [The next gemara is a relevant story about shechting fresh beef on
Motzaei Shabbos.]

Rashi: Motzaei Shabbos: Also a Kavod Shabbos, to escort it when leaving, in a kavod way, like one who escorts the king when he leaves the city.

I included R' Elazar in this excerpt for a specific point. In an earlier post, I wondered
> if the true purpose of this seudah might have little or nothing
> to do with Shabbos. Could it be that the true purpose is to
> nourish that bone that doesn't decompose, or some other purpose,
> and "escorting the Queen" is merely a story for the masses?

But now I retract that idea. One might think that it is Rashi who
introduced the idea that this seudah is l'kavos Shabbos, but the
juxtaposition of R' Elazar and R' Chanina makes it clear that this idea
originated *not* with Rashi, but was already present in the Gemara.

Anyway, this Gemara seems to support my offlist correspondent, who had given his rebbe's explanation of Melavah Malka:

> He said it originated in a time when it was hard to have really
> hot fresh-tasting food on Shabbos day, and so that you wouldn't
> have a taana against Shabbos, you should have something like that
> right after Shabbos. Therefore the MM food because "l'shaym kavod
> Shabbos" quite literally.

The Maharsha on this Gemara seems extremely relevant:

"Pas chama - fresh bread: The reason for it is that one should honor the
Shabbos at the escorting meal with something new, which was heated after
Shabbos, to get a hanaah from it which had been forbidden during that day -
hot water and fresh bread. Close to this is the reason for the bracha of
Meorei Ha'eish on Motzaei Shabbos and Yom Kippur on the ner which is
something brand new for hanaah now, for it was assur on the Shabbos day
that just passed. And since most eating and drinking on Shabbos is cold, it
causes illness. That's why it says that hot water at the escorting meal on
Motzaei Shabbos is a refuah."

This clearly supports my offlist correspondent. I am still trying to
reconcile "Kavod Shabbos" with "doing melacha after Shabbos has totally
departed", and I'm still considering the analogy to Chol Hamoed that I gave
in my previous post.

... Just before sending this post, I came up with another idea, based on the idea:

> so that you wouldn't have a taana against Shabbos, you should
> have something like that right after Shabbos.

Consider the halacha on when Lag Baomer is on Sunday. In such a case, the
halacha says that getting a haircut on Sunday -- i.e., appearing
well-groomed so soon after Shabbos -- is an insult to Shabbos. This allows
us to get a haircut on Erev Shabbos, even though it is only the 31st day of
Sefirah. It suddenly occurs to me that if one can insult Shabbos in such a
manner even after it has totally left, then perhaps we can also *honor* the
Shabbos even after it has totally left, by doing the things that we were
not allowed to do on Shabbos itself.

No, I'm sorry. This does not answer my question. It merely illustrates what
I meant when I started this thread, and wrote that Melava Malka appears to
show how happy and excited we are to be doing melacha again.

Related question: If Shabbos is "me'ein olam haba", then will there be a
followup afterwards? After olam haba, will we have a "place" where we'll be
encouraged to do things that couldn't be done in olam haba?

Akiva Miller
____________________________________________________________
What's your flood risk?
Find flood maps, interactive tools, FAQs, and agents in your area.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/549f4f1556cc14f152229st01vuc

On Sun, Dec 28, 2014 at 12:29:32AM +0000, Kenneth Miller via Avodah wrote:
: This clearly supports my offlist correspondent. I am still trying to
: reconcile "Kavod Shabbos" with "doing melacha after Shabbos has totally
: departed", and I'm still considering the analogy to Chol Hamoed that I
: gave in my previous post.

"Sheishes yamim ta'avod ve'asisa kol melkhatekha,
veyom hashevi'i Shabbos Lashem E-lokekha."

Working during the rest of the week is part of what Shabbos is about.

Make of that what you will, and I'll be"H write more after I defeat the
flu. (Consider that the moderator's "heads up" about possible wait times.)

Gut Voch!
-Micha

On 12/26/2014 02:19 PM, Kenneth Miller via Avodah wrote:
>
> R' Zev Sero responded:
>> I don't think anyone actually says "Yerushalayim" bedavka. It's
>> Eretz Yisrael, because that's where the Tana'im lived.  EY is
>> all pretty much at the same latitude; the difference between
>> the length of twilight in the Galil and the Negev is negligible,
>> *especially* at the equinox, when twilights are at their shortest
>> anyway.


> First, in order to do the calculations, you DO need to choose a
> specific location. That means not only a specific city, but a
> stop*in*  that city. You might choose to work with approximate
> numbers, but those number*will*  represent one specific location.

If you want to run the algorithm on a computer, you need to input
a latitude, but the Tana'im didn't do that, and they didn't tell you
to do that.  They didn't specify a location, because they didn't
have to.  As you found, all of EY is pretty much the same. If R
Yehuda says that tzeis hakochavim is 3/4 of a mill after shkiah,
he doesn't have to specify where in EY he means; it will work just
as well anywhere.

Sura, Pumbedisa, and Sinai are irrelevant; the Tana'im didn't live
there, so why would they be talking about those places?

As you discovered,
> 32.8 degrees North - Tiberias
> 31.8 degrees North - Jerusalem

and
> 33 degrees North: 83 minutes
> 32 degrees North: 82 minutes
> 31 degrees North: 81 minutes

So even for the longest measure of twilight, the difference between
the far north and the the far south of EY is no more than 2 minutes.
For shorter twilights it will be less.

> But that's just for the equinox. Here's Astronomical Twilight on June 21:

How is that relevant?  The shiurim in kedei hiluch mill were given
for the equinoxes, not for the solstices.

R' Zev Sero wrote:

> If you want to run the algorithm on a computer, you need to
> input a latitude, but the Tana'im didn't do that, and they
> didn't tell you to do that. They didn't specify a location,
> because they didn't have to. As you found, all of EY is pretty
> much the same. If R Yehuda says that tzeis hakochavim is 3/4
> of a mill after shkiah, he doesn't have to specify where in EY
> he means; it will work just as well anywhere.

Do you deny that on any given day, at 3/4 of a mil after shkiah, the sky will be slightly brighter in northern EY and slightly darker in southern EY?

Wait, don't respond yet! I wrote the above -- and quite a few lengthy paragraphs that have now been deleted -- but now I realize I was mistaken.

I was trying to pin down this shiur as precisely as possible. It now seems
to me that tying Bein Hashmashos to a specific city in the Middle East is
like tying Kezayis to a specific species of olive. Rather, we look at a
"typical" or "average" olive (or egg, whatever), and that's it. So too, the
zmanim calculation can based anywhere in the vicinity, exactly as R' Zev
says.

I had been concerned about the person who really needs to push the accuracy
of his chart to the limits. But I have a new appreciation for the
importance of not doing that. It's not just things like atmospheric
refraction and questions about the halachic definition of "shkia". This is
yet another problem to add to those.

On a side point, RSZ also wrote:

> Sura, Pumbedisa, and Sinai are irrelevant; the Tana'im didn't
> live there, so why would they be talking about those places?

Regarding Sura and Pumbedisa: Please forgive my ignorance. Where do you say the Tana'im lived?

Akiva Miller
____________________________________________________________
Want to place your ad here?
Advertise on United Online
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/549f8ddbaa8bdda1e57st01vuc

On Sun, Dec 28, 2014 at 04:57:13AM +0000, Kenneth Miller via Avodah wrote:
: Regarding Sura and Pumbedisa: Please forgive my ignorance. Where do
: you say the Tana'im lived?

The early tannaim lived across the middle of current day Israel:
Yerushalayim, Lud, obviously as far south as Yavnah (which is still
north of Ashqelon), etc..

There there was the Mered haGaluyos (the Kitos War 115-117 CE) in which a
number  of Jewish communities in chu"l rebelled. That's when Jewish
Alexandria (with the huge Temple) fell, and also massacres in Libya (in
Cyrenaica), Cyprus, Mesopotamia...

And subsequently Hadrian clamped down on the Jews and Judaism, so we
responded with the Bar Kochva revolt.

That ended free Jewish life down south, and the center of learning during
the late tannaim through the amoraim of EY was in places like Katzrin,
Teveriah, and Tzipori.

    Tangent about Katzrin: Usually the name is mistranslated "Caeseria",
    however, it's provably a place in the Golan, described here
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katzrin_ancient_village_and_synagogue
    They found a building actually labeled over the doorway that it
    was the beis medrash of R' Elazar haKapar. Doubly notable because
    the definition of new shoes in the Y-mi is ones that haven't been
    walked in as far from the main shul of Katzrin to R' Elazar haKapar's
    beis medrash.

When discussing Bein haShemashos, Pesachim 94a quotes a beraisa with
a statement from R' Yehudah, Rabba says he means 3/4 of a mil and R'
Yosef says 2/3. Meanwhile on Shabbos 34b, Rabbi Yehudah says 4 mil.
The machloqes between the ge'onim and the rishonim is all about how
resolve the two. But back to the question of where:

Rabbi Yehudah: lived during the immigration from Judea to the Galil.
Sanhedrin switched locations more than once from Yavneh to Usha (Galil),
so we don't know where he was when the statement in the beraisa was made.

Rabba was the Gaon (RY) of Pumpedisa.

R' Yosef probably also lived in Pumpedisa as well, given his constant
contact with Rabba and Abayei. But I really don't know.

I also don't think Rabba and R Yosef would have been speaking in different
terms than the tanna they're trying to understand. I would think we just
need to deal with the uncertainty between Yavneh and Usha.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             There's only one corner of the universe
mi...@aishdas.org        you can be certain of improving,
http://www.aishdas.org   and that's your own self.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                 - Aldous Huxley

On 12/27/2014 11:57 PM, Kenneth Miller via Avodah wrote:

> Do you deny that on any given day, at 3/4 of a mil after shkiah, the
> sky will be slightly brighter in northern EY and slightly darker in
> southern EY?

No, but as you discovered, the difference, at least at the equinox,
is insignificant.   And when translated into degrees the sun is below
the horizon, it's still insignificant.  I haven't run the numbers,
but I guess it's less than 10 minutes of arc.  That's so small it
gets lost in the noise of the inherent imprecision of these shiurim,
caused by things like atmospheric refraction.


> On a side point, RSZ also wrote:

>> Sura, Pumbedisa, and Sinai are irrelevant; the Tana'im didn't
>> live there, so why would they be talking about those places?

> Regarding Sura and Pumbedisa: Please forgive my ignorance. Where do
> you say the Tana'im lived?

As far as I know all the Tana'im lived in EY.

R' Micha Berger wrote:
> "Sheishes yamim ta'avod ve'asisa kol melkhatekha,
> veyom hashevi'i Shabbos Lashem E-lokekha."
> Working during the rest of the week is part of what
> Shabbos is about.

Yes, but I don't see it as something to celebrate. We light a fire in
Havdala; dayenu.

Refuah sh'leimah!
Akiva Miller

RZS wrote [on Areivim]:
> Until recently Milah itself carried a significant risk, and yet the
> Torah required us to assume it for the sake of the mitzvah.

Can someone please bring Halachic support for the Torah obliging us
to perform BerisMilah even where there is danger to life? Or danger
to limb? Or significant risk. The Yidden did not perform BerisMilah
whilst travelling in the Midbar, and one may assume this was with the
Heskem of Moshe Rabbenu.

I don't think there is any Halachic support because there is no such
obligation. Perhaps there is some confusion with the Mesirus Nefesh
displayed by Ehrlicher Yidden where there was a Gezriras Shmad in Russia.

RZS continues and seems to be suggesting that MBP is an obligation equal
to BerisMilah itself, saying - it pays to remember that we are obligated
to assume any risk up to that level. Nobody even dreams of claiming
that the risk from MBP rises to anywhere near that level.

Now this is just not true. Metzitza [not MBP] is enforced by the Gemara
not as a Halachic requirement but a medical requirement. Performing
Metzitza on Shabbos is Muttar for no other reason but for the
health benefits it provides to the baby, who without it is at risk of
infection. There is evidence today that Metzitza is of no benefit at all
in preventing infection, nor that it provides any other health benefit.

So today, with normal medical procedures and hygiene standards, there
is no risk to the baby, there is no need to perform any metzitza.

Therefore Metzitza should, I think be maintained even today, simply
to retain our tradition. Whether MBP should be maintained in spite of
whatever risks may be associated with it, depends it seems on how holy
one considers our customs and to what extent they ought to be preserved.

But there should be no argument at all that on Shabbos we should only
PRETEND to perform metzitza. Metzitza itself, which is performed to
cause the wound to bleed, is an Issur DeOraysa, and is being performed
only to maintain traditions. This is not Doche Shabbos.

On 12/30/2014 06:18 PM, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi via Avodah wrote:
> RZS wrote [on Areivim]:
>> >Until recently Milah itself carried a significant risk, and yet the
>> >Torah required us to assume it for the sake of the mitzvah.

> Can someone please bring Halachic support for the Torah obliging us
> to perform BerisMilah even where there is danger to life? Or danger
> to limb? Or significant risk.

Until recently, *every* bris carried significant risk.  If the Torah
did not oblige us to assume this risk, milah would have died out
altogether.

What's more, in addition to the usual risks, we were aware of the
existence of hereditary conditions that made milah almost inevitably
fatal, and we had no way to test for these conditions, so at every
bris there was a chance that the baby had such a condition and would
die from it.  What's more, even if a family had already lost one baby,
thus dramatically increasing the odds that it carried such a condition,
it was still obligated to circumise the next baby.  Only once a family
had lost two babies did the risk rise to a level where it could override
the requirement for milah.


> Now this is just not true. Metzitza [not MBP] is enforced by the
> Gemara not as a Halachic requirement but a medical requirement.

That is not true.

> Performing Metzitza on Shabbos is Muttar for no other reason but for
> the health benefits it provides to the baby,

That is garbage.  You are mixing it up with bandaging the wound.
On the contrary, it is clear from the law of tzitzin she'einan me`akvin
on Shabbos that bandaging the wound is *not* part of the mitzvah, but
Metzitza is.   If you notice a tzitz she'eino me`akev before metzitzah
is complete you cut it off because you are still occupied with the
mitzvah, but if you notice it after metzitzah but before bandaging you
may not cut it off, because you are no longer occupied with the mitzvah.
QED.


> But there should be no argument at all that on Shabbos we should only
> PRETEND to perform metzitza. Metzitza itself, which is performed to
> cause the wound to bleed, is an Issur DeOraysa, and is being performed
> only to maintain traditions. This is not Doche Shabbos.

This is megaleh panim batorah shelo kehalacha.

On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 03:13:08PM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote:
: >Now this is just not true. Metzitza [not MBP] is enforced by the
: >Gemara not as a Halachic requirement but a medical requirement.

: That is not true.

We've been around this bend thrice now. Both are true, it's a machloqes
acharonim.

The mishnah (Shabbos 19:2)lists four steps to a beris that are machalel Shabbos:
- milah
- peri'ah
- metzitzah
- isplanis vekamon (prounounced: cumin)

Milah and peri'ah are definitely part of the beris itself, and trump
Shabbos because of "bayom hashemini".
The use of a compress with cumin was definitely medicinal, and trumped
Shabbos because of piquach nefesh.

Metzitzah too is definitely medicinal, because Rab Papa (Shabbos 133b)
tells us that a mohel who skips metzitzah causes a saqanah and must
be fired.

The question is, is it /only/ medicinal, or is it /also/ an integral
part of the beris milah?

The same sugya says that tzitzin she'ein me'qavin that are left after
a Shabbos beris are not dochin Shabbos once the beris is done. And it
spells out what "done" means: metzitzah.

So there are strong grounds to argue that aside from any medical benefit,
metzitzah is part of the beris itself in a way that other medical care
is not.

And once you get to that point one can't rationalize away details like
whether or not metzitzah must be bepeh, and if so, must it be direct or
is via a pipette still "bepeh" enough?

: >But there should be no argument at all that on Shabbos we should only
: >PRETEND to perform metzitza. Metzitza itself, which is performed to
: >cause the wound to bleed, is an Issur DeOraysa, and is being performed
: >only to maintain traditions. This is not Doche Shabbos.

: This is megaleh panim batorah shelo kehalacha.

I wouldn't go that far, it's simply the halakhah as per Litvisher or
Yekkish norms as though they were the only shitah. Just as your response
pretends those shitos don't even exist.

But I think that pretending to perform metzitzah is assur deOraisa,
see Shemos 23:7. If it's not for shalom, distorting the truth is no
less assur than remaining an areil.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             For a mitzvah is a lamp,
mi...@aishdas.org        And the Torah, its light.
http://www.aishdas.org                   - based on Mishlei 6:2
Fax: (270) 514-1507

On 12/31/2014 05:16 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> Metzitzah too is definitely medicinal, because Rab Papa (Shabbos 133b)
> tells us that a mohel who skips metzitzah causes a saqanah and must
> be fired.
>
> The question is, is it/only/  medicinal, or is it/also/  an integral
> part of the beris milah?

The medical benefit is why a mohel who omitted it is fired.  If not
for that, he would simply be taught better and given another chance.
But as far as the mitzvah is concerned it's a side benefit.

> So there are strong grounds to argue that aside from any medical
> benefit, metzitzah is part of the beris itself in a way that other
> medical care  is not.

There are many sources that it's part of the mitzvah.  This is
merely the slam dunk that *proves* it.


> And once you get to that point one can't rationalize away details
> like whether or not metzitzah must be bepeh, and if so, must it be
> direct or is via a pipette still "bepeh" enough?

Whether a tube counts as "befeh" is a different question, and one
that's subject to a huge machlokes of the 19th-century poskim.
The list on each side is daunting enough that nobody can state
definitively which side is right.  De`avad kemar `avad, ude`avad
kemar `avad.  But that's different from omitting metzitzah altogether,
or denying that it's part of the mitzvah.

> : >But there should be no argument at all that on Shabbos we should only
> : >PRETEND to perform metzitza. Metzitza itself, which is performed to
> : >cause the wound to bleed, is an Issur DeOraysa, and is being performed
> : >only to maintain traditions. This is not Doche Shabbos.
>
> : This is megaleh panim batorah shelo kehalacha.
>
> I wouldn't go that far, it's simply the halakhah as per Litvisher or
> Yekkish norms as though they were the only shitah. Just as your response
> pretends those shitos don't even exist.

Chas veshalom.   *How* to do metzitzah is a machlokes, but there is
no opinion that it may be omitted altogether, let alone that on
Shabbos it *must* be omitted.  *That* is megaleh panim batorah shelo
kehalacha.

The artist group Robotlab has recently developed a method for creating a
?handwritten? Torah robotically
<http://www.jmberlin.de/main/EN/01-Exhibitions/02-Speci
al-Exhibitions/2014/bios_torah.php>!
Their work will be displayed through January 11, 2015, at the Jewish Museum
in Berlin, Germany, in an exhibit titled ?The Creation of the World.?
<http://www.jmberlin.de/main/EN/01-Exhibitions/02-Specia
l-Exhibitions/2014/braginsky.php>

Could the scroll written by this robot be used in a synagogue? The answer,
alas, is no.

Even though the robot?s 260-foot-long scroll contains the necessary 304,805
letters required for a Torah scroll, it is still not considered kosher.
*Halakhah* stipulates that a Torah scroll must be written on parchment and
that the scribe must use a quill dipped in ink. These materials must come
from ritually clean animals. The robot?s scroll is made of paper, not
parchment, and written with a pen, not a quill.

Further, while writing a Torah, the scribe must be reverent?something
impossible for a robot to achieve. Rabbi Reuven Yaacobov (rabbi of the
orthodox Sephardic synagogue in Berlin and Torah scribe) explains, ?In
order for the Torah to be holy, it has to be written with a goose feather
on parchment; the process has to be filled with meaning.? The scribe says
prayers as he writes it.

for the full article see
see
http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/news/the-robo-scribe/
?mqsc=E3785794&;utm_source=WhatCountsEmail&utm_medium=BHD+Daily%
20Newsletter&utm_campaign=E5B101

-----------------------------------
actually I am not sure if is so easy.
I would assume that it easy to replace the paper by parchment (more
expensive).
Using a pen instead of a quill is a technical problem. I would guess that
if they really wanted they could change the program to use a quill instead
of a pen.


Thus the main question
"the process has to be filled with meaning.? The scribe says prayers as he
writes it. "

BTW does the sofer really say prayers while writing ?
As to kavanah and le-shma is it any different then machine shmura matzah
where pushing the button is considered as having "shem mitzvat matzah"
For a sefer Torah it would be a little more complicated since one needs
kavvanah for each name of G-d. However, one could probably find away around
that (eg the robot would stop before each shem hashem and someone would
restart the program from there - clumsy but doable)




-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20150101/c06440bb/attachment.htm>

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



_______________________________________________
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.)